New research clarifies how a powerful individual can convince a group of people to disregard a statement of fact—no matter how strong the supporting scientific evidence—and instead take up a false position.
Researchers analyzed the conditions under which group discussion reaches consensus and propagates either true or false positions depending on the group’s influence system. Their findings appear in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.
“A person can be highly charismatic, but ignorant.”
“Our research is driven by a mathematical model of how interpersonal influence systems function,” says coauthor Noah Friedkin, a professor of sociology at the University of California, Santa Barbara.
“We sought to apply it to the important problem of understanding the substantial hazard rate of groups adopting false positions on issues that have a communicable method for obtaining a true opinion.”
Underlying the research is the reality of human nature. “There are two things at play,” notes coauthor Francesco Bullo, a professor of mechanical engineering. “There is the scientific logic, a rational way with actual numbers that say this is the truth, and then there are people who don’t understand the method or who say ‘I don’t believe the method or the outcome.'”
While classic experiments focused on before and after opinions of individuals participating in group tests, Friedkin and Bullo dialed down to the throughput—complex interpersonal influences swirling among individual members of a group. As they note in their paper, the researchers “provide evidence that a general model in the network science on opinion dynamics substantially clarifies how truth wins in groups.”
One ‘dominator’ can damage a group project
According to Friedkin, group tests showed people vary on how open or closed they are to influence, depending on the issue. People who know a topic well are unlikely to be swayed, he says, while those unfamiliar with a particular issue can be manipulated by someone who appears authoritative on the matter.
He points out that research shows influence is not necessarily associated with a true or false position. “A person can be highly charismatic, but ignorant,” Friedkin says. “The charisma or authority position may outweigh expertise.”
Source: UC Santa Barbara
