Related Experiment Video
Updated: May 24, 2026
06:18
The Collective Trust Game: An Online Group Adaptation of the Trust Game Based on the HoneyComb Paradigm
Published on: October 20, 2022
From social network (centralized vs. decentralized) to collective decision-making (unshared vs. shared consensus)
Cédric Sueur1, Jean-Louis Deneubourg, Odile Petit
1Unit of Social Ecology, Université Libre de Bruxelles, Campus Plaine, Bd du Triomphe, Brussels, Belgium. cedric.sueur@iphc.cnrs.fr
Plos One
|March 7, 2012
Summary
Social network structure influences group decision-making. Centralized networks empower leaders, while decentralized ones distribute influence, a pattern observed in both human and animal societies.
Area of Science:
- Social network analysis
- Behavioral ecology
- Computational biology
Background:
- Social relationships shape individual and collective decisions in humans and animals.
- While social networks influence many biological phenomena, consensus emergence remains unclear.
- Animal societies exhibit varying degrees of centralized (despotic) and decentralized (egalitarian) structures.
Purpose of the Study:
- To investigate how social network properties influence consensus formation and collective movement.
- To model the relationship between network topology and decision-making patterns.
- To compare model predictions with empirical data from primate societies.
Main Methods:
- Agent-based modeling to simulate collective behavior on artificial social networks.
- Creation of networks representing a spectrum from centralized (star) to decentralized (equal) structures.
- Comparison of model outputs with observational data from five primate groups.
Main Results:
- Different social network structures yield distinct patterns of consensus and collective movement.
- Decentralization diminishes the leadership role of central individuals in collective decisions.
- A clear link exists between social network type and the resulting group consensus.
Conclusions:
- Social network architecture is a key determinant of consensus and collective action.
- The findings are consistent with observed social dynamics in primate groups.
- This study provides a theoretical framework for understanding social organization in biological systems.
Related Concept Videos
00:52Social Proof
Social proof is a form of persuasion based on comparison and conformity. People compare their behavior and actions to what others are doing and will change to conform to do what their peers do.
02:06Social Exchange Theory
We have discussed why we form relationships, what attracts us to others, and different types of love. But what determines whether we are satisfied with and stay in a relationship? One theory that provides an explanation is social exchange theory. According to social exchange theory, we act as naïve economists in keeping a tally of the ratio of costs and benefits of forming and maintaining a relationship with others (Rusbult & Van Lange, 2003).
01:26Social Exchange Theory
As formulated by John Thibaut and Harold Kelley, Social Exchange Theory explains human relationships as economic-like exchanges that maximize rewards and minimize costs. This theory suggests that individuals engage in relationships to gain benefits and reduce burdens, similar to economic transactions. It has been widely applied to various types of relationships, including romantic, professional, and social interactions.Rewards and Costs in RelationshipsRelationship rewards include emotional...
01:01Group Polarization
Group polarization is the strengthening of an original group attitude following the discussion of views within a group (Teger & Pruitt, 1967). That is, if a group initially favors a viewpoint, after discussion the group consensus is likely a stronger endorsement of the viewpoint. Conversely, if the group was initially opposed to a viewpoint, group discussion would likely lead to stronger opposition.
01:30Self Within Cultural Contexts
Cultural frameworks for understanding the self are often categorized into two broad orientations: individualism and collectivism. These paradigms influence how people define themselves, relate to others, and interpret their social worlds. Each orientation offers distinct perspectives on autonomy, responsibility, and the role of the individual within a community.Individualistic CulturesIn individualistic cultures like North America and Western Europe, identity is understood as autonomous and...
01:30Social Foundations of Self IV: Self in Digital Communication
Since the early 2000s, computer-mediated communication (CMC) has grown rapidly, playing a crucial role in self-development. A key distinction between CMC and real-life interactions is the lack of a physically present partner. This absence makes non-verbal cues such as facial expressions, body language, and paralinguistic signals unavailable in CMC platforms like email, instant messaging, or social media. The lack of these cues can create ambiguity and complicate how feedback is interpreted.The...