Albert B. Kao

Cognitive abilities are central to how animals navigate complex environments. Beyond individual cognition, group living can also enhance navigation by pooling individually acquired information. One way this may be achieved is by following experienced leaders, which requires recognizing expertise within group members. Alternatively, accurate decisions could also emerge without expert opinions, through simpler mechanisms like the ‘wisdom of crowds’ principle that average out individual biases. Consequently, collective navigation strategies range from cognitively complex to simple, and yet, the prevalence or interplay of different collective strategies in nature remains unexplored. In this study, we asked: what is the navigation mechanism, requiring minimal cognitive demands, that is necessary and sufficient to quantitatively replicate the experimental results of a 2017 study on homing pigeons ( Columba livia ), which showed that sequential chains of bird pairs flying home—similar to a game of telephone—led to shorter homing routes compared to control birds flying individually or in fixed pairs. Our results show that the experimental data aligns closely with the simplest strategy—route averaging. Surprisingly, the complex mechanism of selectively propagating the best flight through social learning offered no additional advantage. We further observed that mixed strategies, although not supported by the experimental data, in theory combined advantages from both averaging and active selection of better routes, resulting in even greater performance. Hence, our results highlight the potential for future research to investigate selective pressures shaping the evolution of cultural learning and trade-offs among different decision mechanisms theoretically available to social animals in nature.

Cognitive abilities are central to how animals navigate complex environments. Beyond individual cognition, group living can also enhance navigation by pooling individually acquired information. One way this may be achieved is by following experienced leaders, which requires recognizing expertise within group members. Alternatively, accurate decisions could also emerge without expert opinions, through simpler mechanisms like the ‘wisdom of crowds’ principle that average out individual biases. Consequently, collective navigation strategies range from cognitively complex to simple, and yet, the prevalence or interplay of different collective strategies in nature remains unexplored. In this study, we asked: what is the navigation mechanism, requiring minimal cognitive demands, that is necessary and sufficient to quantitatively replicate the experimental results of a 2017 study on homing pigeons (Columba livia), which showed that sequential chains of bird pairs flying home — similar to a game of telephone — led to shorter homing routes compared to control birds flying individually or in fixed pairs. Our results show that the experimental data aligns closely with the simplest strategy — route averaging. Surprisingly, the complex mechanism of selectively propagating the best flight through social learning offered no additional advantage. We further observed that mixed strategies, although not supported by the experimental data, in theory combined advantages from both averaging and active selection of better routes, resulting in even greater performance. Hence, our results highlight the potential for future research to investigate selective pressures shaping the evolution of cultural learning and trade-offs among different decision mechanisms theoretically available to social animals in nature.

Research on online news consumption has long focused on improving people’s ability to select accurate news sources. However, people who consume accurate information do not necessarily make an accurate collective. Reliable information aggregation and collective decision-making also benefit from independence between judgments. We tested whether collective incentives can improve collective accuracy by reducing judgment correlation, even when average individual accuracy remains unchanged. We define collective incentives as reward structures that tie an individual’s payoff to the accuracy of their group’s aggregated decision rather than their own personal accuracy. In an online experiment ( N = 232), participants made forecasts after viewing realistic tweets from correlated or independent news sources. Shared tweets among group members were more accurate but fully correlated across group members; local tweets were less accurate but independent between participants. When rewarded for collective accuracy, participants used more independent local tweets, improving collective but not individual accuracy. Generalizing our findings, an exploratory analysis of public news datasets found a greater content correlation among larger publishers, modulated by accuracy. These findings highlight the overlooked importance of judgment independence alongside accuracy in creating thriving information ecologies online. Collective incentives may complement accuracy-based interventions by nudging news consumption towards diverse, local, and independent sources. We discuss how future research should implement collective incentives to improve collective decisions in real-world settings.

Cognitive abilities are central to how animals navigate complex environments. Beyond individual cognition, group living can also enhance navigation by pooling individually acquired information. One way this may be achieved is by following experienced leaders, which requires recognizing expertise within group members. Alternatively, accurate decisions could also emerge without expert opinions, through simpler mechanisms like the ‘wisdom of crowds’ principle that average out individual biases. Consequently, collective navigation strategies range from cognitively complex to simple, and yet, the prevalence or interplay of different collective strategies in nature remains unexplored. In this study, we asked: what is the navigation mechanism, requiring minimal cognitive demands, that is necessary and sufficient to quantitatively replicate the experimental results of a 2017 study on homing pigeons ( Columba livia ), which showed that sequential chains of bird pairs flying home — similar to a game of telephone — led to shorter homing routes compared to control birds flying individually or in fixed pairs. Our results show that the experimental data aligns closely with the simplest strategy — route averaging. Surprisingly, the complex mechanism of selectively propagating the best flight through social learning offered no additional advantage. We further observed that mixed strategies, although not supported by the experimental data, in theory combined advantages from both averaging and active selection of better routes, resulting in even greater performance. Hence, our results highlight the potential for future research to investigate selective pressures shaping the evolution of cultural learning and trade-offs among different decision mechanisms theoretically available to social animals in nature.

The past decade has witnessed a dramatically growing interest in collective intelligence - the phenomenon of groups having an ability to make more accurate decisions than isolated individuals. However, the vast majority of studies to date have focused, either explicitly or implicitly, on spatial decisions (e.g., potential nest sites, food patches, or migration directions). We highlight the equally important, but severely understudied, realm of temporal collective decision-making, i.e., decisions about when to perform an action. We argue that temporal collective decision making is likely to differ from spatial decision making in several crucial ways and probably involves different mechanisms, model predictions, and experimental outcomes. We anticipate that research focused on temporal decisions should lead to a radically expanded understanding of the adaptiveness and constraints of living in groups.

From biofilms to whale pods, organisms across taxa live in groups, thereby accruing numerous diverse benefits of sociality. All social organisms, however, pay the inherent cost of increased resource competition. One expects that when resources become scarce, this cost will increase, causing group sizes to decrease. Indeed, this occurs in some species, but there are also species for which group sizes remain stable or even increase under scarcity. What accounts for these opposing responses? We present a conceptual framework, literature review, and theoretical model demonstrating that differing responses to sudden resource shifts can be explained by which sociality benefit exerts the strongest selection pressure on a particular species. We categorize resource-related benefits of sociality into six functionally distinct classes and model their effect on the survival of individuals foraging in groups under different resource conditions. We find that whether, and to what degree, the optimal group size (or correlates thereof) increases, decreases, or remains constant when resource abundance declines depends strongly on the dominant sociality mechanism. Existing data, although limited, support our model predictions. Overall, we show that across a wide diversity of taxa, differences in how group size shifts in response to resource declines can be driven by differences in the primary benefits of sociality.

We develop a conceptual framework for studying collective adaptation in complex socio-cognitive systems, driven by dynamic interactions of social integration strategies, social environments and problem structures. Going beyond searching for ‘intelligent’ collectives, we integrate research from different disciplines and outline modelling approaches that can be used to begin answering questions such as why collectives sometimes fail to reach seemingly obvious solutions, how they change their strategies and network structures in response to different problems and how we can anticipate and perhaps change future harmful societal trajectories. We discuss the importance of considering path dependence, lack of optimization and collective myopia to understand the sometimes counterintuitive outcomes of collective adaptation. We call for a transdisciplinary, quantitative and societally useful social science that can help us to understand our rapidly changing and ever more complex societies, avoid collective disasters and reach the full potential of our ability to organize in adaptive collectives.

Background: Models of collective decision-making typically assume that individuals sample information independently and decide instantaneously. In most natural and sociological settings, however, decisions occur over some timescale in which group members gather information—often from multiple sources. Information sources may persist for varying lengths of time or be viewed concurrently and identically by multiple group members. These tendencies introduce spatio-temporal correlations in gathered information with poorly understood consequences. Research Design: Here, we develop a collective decision-making model in which individuals’ access and switch between two conflicting cues that differ in their spatio-temporal properties. Results: Our model reveals that spatially and temporally correlated cues can profoundly affect collective decisions. Specifically, we observe that spatially correlated cues are dominant when individuals rarely switch between sources of information. Temporally correlated cues, on the other hand, have the strongest impact when individuals frequently switch between information sources. We also discuss how much the usage of independent information must be increased to counter the impact of correlation. Conclusions: The present model represents a first step toward more accurately capturing the complex mechanisms underlying collective decision-making in natural systems and reveals multiple ways in which the properties of environmental cues can impact collective behavior.

Collective behavior provides a framework for understanding how the actions and properties of groups emerge from the way individuals generate and share information. In humans, information flows were initially shaped by natural selection yet are increasingly structured by emerging communication technologies. Our larger, more complex social networks now transfer high-fidelity information over vast distances at low cost. The digital age and the rise of social media have accelerated changes to our social systems, with poorly understood functional consequences. This gap in our knowledge represents a principal challenge to scientific progress, democracy, and actions to address global crises. We argue that the study of collective behavior must rise to a “crisis discipline” just as medicine, conservation, and climate science have, with a focus on providing actionable insight to policymakers and regulators for the stewardship of social systems.