Democracies Need Sheep to Survive, Researchers Claim

You don't need to be a believer, just shut up and follow the leader. That's the message that Princeton researcher Iain Couzin is sending with a report entitled, “Uninformed Individuals Promote Democratic Consensus in Animal Groups” from ScienceMag.org. The report's abstract is as follows: “Conflicting interests among group members are common when making collective decisions, yet failure to achieve consensus can be costly. Under these circumstances individuals may be susceptible to manipulation by a strongly opinionated, or extremist, minority. It has previously been argued, for humans and animals, that social groups containing individuals who are uninformed, or exhibit weak preferences, are particularly vulnerable to such manipulative agents. Here, we use theory and experiment to demonstrate that, for a wide range of conditions, a strongly opinionated minority can dictate group choice, but the presence of uninformed individuals spontaneously inhibits this process, returning control to the numerical majority. Our results emphasize the role of uninformed individuals in achieving democratic consensus amid internal group conflict and informational constraints.” As io9 points out, that “theory and experiment” used by Couzin and his team consists of real fish and virtual humans. In other words, Couzin watched Finding Nemo and played a game of The Sims. Sarcasm aside, one has to wonder what this researcher hopes to accomplish by publishing these “findings.” He may simply hope to get his name in the news. If that's all he wants, congratulations buddy – he did it! His name is on the Internet. Celebrate and thank Andy Warhol for his accurate prediction that anyone can be world-famous for 15 minutes. Whatever his reasoning, I have to say that I am particularly bothered by Couzin's belief that we are better off if the majority of humans are uninformed individuals who choose to follower the leader and/or the one who is most popular. Under this theory, there can never be change. There can never be advancement. We cannot grow or evolve as a species because Political Figure X is currently popular and should maintain that popularity. Otherwise there will be utter chaos! How dare humans change their mind and learn to think about what it is that they are doing! That's crazy talk. If Couzin's is to be believed, we can extend his uninformed assumptions about uninformed individuals to virtually anything. Let's start with cars. The Ford F F-150 is currently the most popular truck in America. It's a beautiful vehicle, but it doesn't always come out on top with the critics, nor does it score every “Truck of the Year” award. And yet it maintains its popularity. Why is that? Is it because consumers truly view the F-150 as the best truck? Or are they simply ignorant to the quality of trucks available from GM GM and Toyota TM? We can't say that they are uninformed because, well, there are plenty of critics (and TV ads! Boy TV ads sure are effective!) providing them with plenty of information. Now let's take a look at PCs. I'd argue that anyone who purchases a computer (laptop or desktop) from Hewlett-Packard HPQ is making a terrible mistake. But people still buy them. Are they buying HP products because a large number of consumers buy them, because they personally like them, or because they are not properly informed? Again, there are numerous critics – myself included – who have written endlessly about the reasons why you shouldn't purchase anything from HP. (Printers excluded.) The overall majority of consumers seem to prefer Apple AAPL, Acer, Asus and Dell DELL. But that hasn't stopped a large number of consumers from supporting HP. Is this proof that Couzin's research is accurate? Is the world less chaotic with HP near the top? Finally, let's bring it all back to politics and look at the last 20 or so years of politicians. Did each President win solely because they were the most popular, and if so, what has it done for our democracy? Did those who were against the war on terror feel like we lived in a democratic society when America went to war? What about those who were in favor of health care reform but not the package we received? What about the people who didn't want health care to be reformed at all – did they feel like their vote counted? The sad truth behind Couzin's research is that politicians thrive on gullible, sheepish voters who follow the leader based on commercials, media bias, and influence from family and friends. Without those factors skewing our nation, the political landscape would be quite different. And while I cannot say for certain that it would be any better than what we have today, I would love the chance to find out. Follow me @LouisBedigian