Cass Sunstein - Deliberating Groups Versus Prediction Markets (or Hayek’s Challenge to Habermas)

7/31/2019 Cass Sunstein - Deliberating Groups Versus Prediction Markets (or Hayeks Challenge to Habermas)

1/22

E P I S E M E

C a s s R . S u n st e i n

Deliberating Groups versus Prediction Markets(or Hayeks Challenge to Habermas)

abstract

F , f . I . G , . D

z x q .F, z j x.B , f , w w . T .

M , , .B w, x, ? A w w w j . B ? T w . G , . A - , w , . T , IJ, w w , .1 W

, , .

M w x . O w . x w f, I w .2 T , w w

w . T , w , . A , f ; z x ;


2/22

E P I S E M E

Deliberating Groups versus Prediction Markets

; x w . I U S, j , R D w w w j

.3

B , f . I, f , , . A , , - . O , x , .4

A w , f , .

I, w x w- .S w , w x w w w . I , w w , w .

deliberating groups

I w, w : Groups are equialent to their best members. O w

f w w, w . F , w . I , . D

, w w j .

Te whole is the sum o the parts: aggregating inormation. D x w w w . S x q , x . O x,

zz w . D w j. I , w q w .

Improving on majority rule. S ,


3/22

E P I S E M E

C R. S

50 . T C J Tw j w x 100 z . P w w j w

w w w . Te whole goes beyond the sum o the parts: synergy. T f w , w w . I , , , , w x w w .

w x w ? w .

F, .5 Af , w .6 S, j f w .7 A w . C j.8 I w w w . T ,

w w w , w w ( q ).U, w

. W q w w, w , w .9H, . w ; , w w

w w w.10 N w , w w w, , ; , w .

I , j w j . I w j w, w w

w.11

W x, . T , w .12


4/22

E P I S E M E


sources of deliberative failure

F w , x w . T w . I X ,

X , w X . I , , . N , w w . P .13 I X , X , w . A

w w-w , .T

. T w, , .I x , w x . I , w w w w , , . H, ,

w j . A j w . I w , w .

P , , w. S q; , , w q. W

w w?F , w w . I , , w . I , f , w , w -, w w. A , w , , x, ,

z, , , .

I w , . I


5/22

E P I S E M E

C R. S

, w . T w w j ( ). I , w: S .

B x , f w w. T : M w- - , A-A, w w -.14 B , w- , . T q w, w w w

.M , j

w q w w w.15 T w , x, , . I w - q , , , , , . T w , w q w. T j w. T , ,

. I j w, w j 79 . I j w w, w j 56 . H, 79 56 j j w . A j w w w, w f (66 62 ). W w w

.

habermas vs. hayek

D , ? M w -w . J H, x, w :

R , q , q . T x z .16


6/22

E P I S E M E


I H , ; ; q.17

O w .18 O w, , ,

x w . I wq . I, w , w.

U, H w w I . T w . E , , q . W

H H (w FH) ( , w H).19

C .

deliberative failure 1: amplification of cognitive errors

I w w w w. T ; j , w .20 F x, w , w w j ( x w A B).21 T x w P Rz C N , j , .22 T f w w, .

P f w q . W , w q w x .23 C, x, q w w , w , . I w z , w . O , , , , x .

F , q w w . T , f , , , w .I ,


7/22

E P I S E M E

C R. S

, .C . I j

, , j

.24

G , , ;25 ;26 w ;27 w;28 ;29 j - .30 I , , w,j w w w w.31 I , , w

.32

deliberative failure 2: hidden profiles and common

knowledge

S . E , w w z w . U, .33 H .H , , common-knowledge efect, w j w .34 T x , w ; w.

Hidden Profles. C w w , -- .35 T w w . R w . T w x w j . P w j, , . T , --, . A w w . T : T w w . M w . T w


8/22

E P I S E M E


. H, w .36

O , w w , w

w w , A.37 I , - w (66 ).I , 67 A 85 f .38 T x . G , x . H, , w w w .

I , , A w 33 w . A w , w , B C; , w , A w . I , 25 A , . B( ) ellf ,

.39

I w, w, , w w . I , w , .

F , w w , , w .40 I w

w x f .41 N . O , j .42 T w , f [] .43

Te Common-Knowledge Eect. T q -w , w j w.44 M , w w


9/22

E P I S E M E

C R. S

j.45 U , j j, w w .46

A x, w z .47 I S j , - x- , w x- . M , w, w w w .48 A , w j f .49

deliberative failure 3: cascades

A w , w j . T w : .I , . I , .

Inormational Cascades. H ,w j. C , f . A , w w. A , .

w w, w z w .50 L w q, q,

w q. E w . B , , j .M. Aw . H z.M. B w w Aw j; , , w Aw. B j w, w Aw w .

Nw , M. C. S Aw B

C w , , . I , C w w w w Aw B. I Aw B , C w , w


10/22

E P I S E M E


. I , C . Nw C w Aw B , w , q w w Aw, B, C . O , w x w C :

(w, w , ). T w Aw .51I w , : T w

. I x j, w w, w, , , w q . T w w . Sq , , x

w .C f w w w;52

. T x j w x w A, w w w, B, w w w .53 Sj $2.00 , ( w I w ). I , w . A j w

( ) w . T j w w w w w. T j w , w . T w x j w w, w w , w ,w w . T j w . A , x . I j , w 66.7 . T x w w

w w w x w w .

I x, f f . Af j w , w w w, w j .54 M 77 , 15 , ,

w w. C w w (, ) (, B). I , 11 j, . A w w w ,


11/22

E P I S E M E

C R. S

w w w w . O , j w 55 . 4-1 w x ( w B):56

able 4:1. An Inormational Cascade

1 2 3 4 5 6

P w R R R W W W

D A A A A A A

Source: W Z, A M I A, 291.

W w , , w j 50 j ( B). B x w , j, . I .57 T -w , w w w, w.

Reputational Cascades. I , w w , w , w w . S A w B w A, A , w , A, . I A B w , C , j,

j , w .I w . O A,

B, C , D , w. I w , , , w x , , . M , x w

.T

x .58 I x, w $0.25 , $0.75


12/22

E P I S E M E


j . T w w w. I , $0.25; , $0.75.

I x, . N w 96.7

, 35.3 , , w w. A w w q , 72.2 . C, , 4-2, w w x ( w B):59

able 4:2. Conormity and Cascades

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

P w R White W W R W W W R WD A A A A A A A A A A

Source: H P, I C.

T x w x w , w . T .

deliberative failure 4: group polarization

T , , w- z, w members o a deliberating group endup adopting a more extreme ersion o the position toward which they tended beoredeliberation began.60 T - ,w x . Gz w , z , US, F, A, G.61 F x, w U S w x w. I, z F.62

G z w , . I q w w U S x , z w ,

w , x . B , z , w w U S x , w z z , , w , x ,


13/22

E P I S E M E

C R. S

f-f. I , w w z, w x . I , j w x; ,

j w w.63

R j z, D R w w w j .64 J z w.65

W z ? T .66 T w- , . P w w w w . A ,

w .I w , , . A , w w x w w .

T x . P w . S w , x, w w . O w , w j

-. T f .67T x w x w

, , , x .68 I w x x, w x w f w .69

N , z w

.70 S , 0.6, (, N K w w w x ). S, , , j , 0.7.R f. Nw f 0.7 ,

( w 0.6). W ( ), w B 0.6 0.7. T x w


14/22

E P I S E M E


- , .., w 0.7.

W w j w . S

w , 0.3. I , z w . N z w . B w w, w .

I . W ? I H x w

. M , , ?

prediction markets

D w , . A , w . A H z,

, w .A - , w , w ,w : Create a market.71 P, , ; , , . S w , w w, z.

Potential and Promise. A .R , f w w. B , w . P w . B , , x,

w w w . A , ( ) w ; , , . T w . I


15/22

E P I S E M E

C R. S

w, .

P . , ,

, w . I , , ; , , , w . W- q , j .

O , , , j w . B w . A ,

; . I , . I , x .72 T . W w 90 , 90 ; w 80 , 80 ; .

S 1988, U Iw Iw E M (IEM),w w . B 2004, z, 451 596 .73 I w 1988 2000, Iw w j 1.5 2.1 G . I 2004, Iw . O N 1, w B w 50.45% K w 49.55% 51.56% B 48.44% K.

P , w, . C Hw S Ex, w ( ) O w w w x . T x , w . A Hw S x O w, w j w-w w- w w w . T

x .74

M w, N W S q w, O J .75 A w w w ;76


16/22

E P I S E M E


f .M w w.

Hw P (HP) C I j

.77

I w x w w , w . F , G w .78 T , w , . T x ; . D w w w. M , E L Mf, w

. , . M

w . I , , f w . T w , , w w . I .

Strategy, Manipulation, and Limitations. I w w w . S w . S S P PFz w W H K R 2005, x P G W. B w J R U S S C. T x w S PFz P B. , w Fz w

B P B w Fz ( B, S H, J K) S C; w j w w O, w w , w .

T . S w .I , x, Iw E

M w , . S , - . T x x , w . B ,


17/22

E P I S E M E

C R. S

, , , .

Ex .S ,

: I , , . M x q w w w w x.

Feasibility, Markets, and Deliberation Once More. I . A j, x, q . A , j w w j, j, w w ( w, j w ). M

, w q. A , q q.

T . W , , . A . N, w q, w

x w w q.79I j

, , .80 I , . O , ( w AIDS), A w , x

w , , 2010, , w, , , , . I , q, j .

T , w ,

w w . S w ; w w - w . I


18/22

E P I S E M E


, . W , f . G , , w w . C

w . Fq w . B w , , w w , w.

T z, . I US, - x w .81I , , w

.82 B , - . W , f j . W w, .

conclusion

G f , . D w , j .M , w w. A q, . T z x , . C z .

P ,

x . S , ww . B w w, . A , f j . x , w f w j, . M ,

I x, .


19/22

E P I S E M E

C R. S

acknowledgements

I C L f.

notes

1 I L. J, Groupthink, 2 . (B: H M , 1982), 79.2 I x C R. S, Why Societies

Need Dissent(C, M.: H U P, 2003), C R. S,Inotopia: How Many Minds Aggregate Knowledge (Nw Y: Ox U P,2006); I w .

3 C R. S, D S, L E, I V F C A: A P I, Virginia Law Reiew 90 (2004): 301.

4 S D J,

Oercondence and War: Te Haoc and Glory o Positie Illusions (C, M.:H U P, 2004): 18083.5 R Bw, Social Psychology, 2 . (Nw Y: F P, 1986): 2067.6 I.7 C H R Gzz, I w O I D C

N D Q: E I C Vw ID M, Organizational Behaior and Human Decision Processes 61 (1995): 305.

8 S R B ., S C O Ex, Journal oExperimental Social Psychology 32 (1996): 537.

9

D G R H, P A A G J,Psychological Bulletin 121 (1997): 149, 161; R H, Ex E GA, Inormation Pooling and Group Decision Making, . B G,G Ow, . (Gw, C.: JAI P, 1986), 129.

10 R J. MC, C M M R, Judgments, Decisions,and Public Policy, . Rj Gw J Fx (C: C UP, 2002), 116, 121.

11 I.12 J. S A, C F, Principles o Forecasting, . J. S

A (B: Kw A, 2001), 433.13 S S, Why Societies Need Dissent.14 C C A A, M D M, Decision Making

in Health Care, . G C F S (Nw Y: CU P, 2000), 267, 27376.

15 R L. T, T E D C G D:W F Mj I I Aw F, Journal o Social Psychology 9(1938): 343.

16 See J H, Bw F N: An Authors Reections, 76 Denv. U. L.Rev. 937, 940 (1999).

17 See J H, W U P?, Communication and theEolution o Society 1, 24, 32 (T MC ., 1979) ( ).

18 See A G D T, Democracy and Disagreements (C,M: H U P, 1997), 78 (


20/22

E P I S E M E


).19 Seegenerally F.A. H, T U Kw S, 35 Am. Econ. Rev. 519 (1945)

( w ).20 For an overview, see Tomas Gilovich, Dale Grif n, and Daniel Kahneman, Heuristics and

Biases: Te Psychology of Intuitive Judgment(New York: Cambridge University Press, 2002).21 A D K, J U: H

B, Judgment under Uncertainty: Heuristics and Biases, . D K, PS, A (C: C U P), 1982, 3.

22 P Rz C N, S M T: T C S H, G, G , K,Heuristics and Biases . 201

23 K, J U, 3.24 MC, C M M R, 116, 121.25 M F. S ., G C A C B , Japanese

Psychological Research 30 (1988): 68.

26 S N L. K ., B J: C I G,Psychology Reiew 103 (1996): 687, 689, 69193.

27 J A. Sz R A. H, A C G J,Organizational Behaior and Human Decision Processes 43 (1989): 1. T x -, x w. S DJ, Oercondence and War,18083.

28 Ew L. S W. C. T, E A A JU S E ( , 1989).

29 G W, E C I G D M,

Organizational Behaior and Human Decision Processes 54 (1993): 430.30 J W. G J C. Mw, I P RP Nw P I ,Journal o Applied Psychology 65 (1980):715; J R. Iw J H. D, C/M P R G,Organizational Behaior and Human Decision Processes 64 (1995): 325.

31 W, E C, 430.32 S ., G C A, 68.33 G S W , H P: A B H,Psychological Inquiry

14 (2003): 304.34

D G R H, T C Kw E: I S G J,Journal o Personality and Social Psychology 65 (1993): 959.35 S R Hw L S, T I C-M

C S B G D, Computers in Human Behaior11(1995): 33.

36 P W, Te Psychology o the Internet(C: C U P,1999), 82.

37 S G S W , P U I GD M: B I S D,Journal o Personalityand Social Psychology 48 (1985): 1467.

38 I., 1473; S , H P, 304.39 S , P U I, 1473.40 I., 1476.41 I.


21/22

E P I S E M E

C R. S42 I.43 S , H P, 305.44 S D G R H, T C Kw E: I

S G J,Journal o Personality and Social Psychology 65 (1993): 959.45 I., 960.46 I., 973.47 S G S ., I S S U D

T Sx-P G, Journal o Personality and Social Psychology 57 (1989):67.

48 I., 78.49 I., 72.50 I w D H, T B L B, Te New Economics

o Human Behaior, . M K I (C: CU P, 1995), 188, 19394.

51 I., 195.52 S ; S, Why Societies Need Dissent.53 S L A C H, I C L,American

Economic Reiew 87 (1997): 847.54 S A H C P, I C: R Ex

Mj R C-Rw I,American Economic Reiew 91(2001): 1508, 1515.

55 T, 72 j w B L A C H,I C L,American Economic Reiew 87 (1997): 847,

64 M W A Z, A M I A A S I C L? Te Economics o Networks: Interaction andBehaiours, . P C . (Nw Y: S, 1998), 291, 304.

56 S W Z, A M I A, 291.57 S A H, I C L, 847.58 S H P, I C, 151517.59 I., 1516.60 R Bw, Social Psychology: Te Second Edition (Nw Y, N.Y.: F P, 1986),

2067.61

I., 204.62 I., 224.63 I.64 S, S, E, I V, 301.65 S D S ., D D: T S Sf, Columbia Law

Reiew 100 (2000): 101.66 Bw, Social Psychology, 20045.67 I. I j

w w, , , w , . S RB ., S C O Ex,Journal o Experimental andSocial Psychology, 32 (1996), 537.

68 B ., S C, 537.69 I.


22/22

E P I S E M E

Deliberating Groups versus Prediction Markets70 I C L ;

.71 F w, J W E Zzwz, P M,Journal

o Economic Perspecties 18 (2004): 107; M Awz, I M,A D, P C-B A, Uniersity o

Chicago Law Reiew 71 (2004): 933; S L, S E M R R,Journal o Corporation Law 28 (2003): 589.

72 F w, D M. P ., T R Pw A M, 291S 987 (2001); D M. P ., T Pw P: E FA W M G, NEC R I R 1000-168(2001). A w ://www../

73 S R W. H & P C. , Harnessing the Power o Inormation: A NewApproach to Economic Deelopment4 (AEI-B J C. F R S,W P N. 04-21, 2004), ://www.-.//

.?=846.74 S R H, D R F (A 2005), ://

...75 R R, Orange Juice and Weather, 74 A. E. R. 861, 871 (1984).76 S W & Zzwz,supra 207, 11314.77 S K-Y C & C R. P, Inormation Aggregation Mechanisms: Concept,

Design, and Implementation or a Sales Forecasting Problem 3 (D. H &S. S., C. I. ., S S W P N. 113, M 2002) ( Hw-P), ://www...

/SSP/w1131..78 S P Cw W W, ://../2005/09/-w-w--w.

79 S R W. H P C. , U I M I DM,Harard Journal o Law and Public Policy 29, N. 1 (F 2005): 213-289.

80 M Awz, P M, A D, PC-B A, Uniersity o Chicago Law Reiew 71 (2004), 933.

81 S J A. S, W M G B G, H B Rw(S. 2002).

82

S B H, P F: I C Nw Ow S(P: P U P, 2006, ).

Cass R. Sunstein K N. Lw D S P, Lw S D P S, U C. H Inotopia: How Many Minds Produce Knowledge (Ox U P, 2006) Worst-Case Scenarios (H U P, 2007).

Documents

Cass Sunstein - Deliberating Groups Versus Prediction Markets (or Hayek’s Challenge to Habermas)