Jove
Visualize
Contact Us

Related Concept Videos

Groupthink01:34

Groupthink

47.3K
When in group settings, we are often influenced by the thoughts, feelings, and behaviors around us. Groupthink is another phenomenon of conformity where modification of the opinions of members in a group aligns with what they believe is the group consensus (Janis, 1972). In such situations, the group often takes action that individuals would not perform outside the group setting because groups make more extreme decisions than individuals do. Moreover, groupthink can hinder opposing trains of...
47.3K
Decision Making: Traditional Method01:14

Decision Making: Traditional Method

4.7K
The process of hypothesis testing based on the traditional method includes calculating the critical value, testing the value of the test statistic using the sample data, and interpreting these values.
First, a specific claim about the population parameter is decided based on the research question and is stated in a simple form. Further, an opposing statement to this claim is also stated. These statements can act as null and alternative hypotheses, out of which a null hypothesis would be a...
4.7K
Decision Making01:20

Decision Making

410
Decision-making is a fundamental cognitive process that involves evaluating alternatives and selecting among them. This process can range from simple choices, such as deciding what to wear, to complex decisions, like choosing a major in college or a career path. The complexity of the decision often dictates the approach we use, which can be broadly categorized into two types: automatic and controlled decision-making.
Automatic decision-making is fast, intuitive, and relies on gut feelings...
410
Hindsight Biases01:12

Hindsight Biases

4.1K
Hindsight bias leads you to believe that the event you just experienced was predictable, even though it really wasn’t. In other words, you knew all along that things would turn out the way they did. Can you relate this to the phrase "Hindsight is 20/20" now? 
4.1K
Decision Making: P-value Method01:09

Decision Making: P-value Method

6.3K
The process of hypothesis testing based on the P-value method includes calculating the P- value using the sample data and interpreting it.
First, a specific claim about the population parameter is proposed. The claim is based on the research question and is stated in a simple form. Further, an opposing statement to the claim  is also stated. These statements can act as null and alternative hypotheses:  a null hypothesis would be a neutral statement while the alternative hypothesis can...
6.3K
Deindividuation00:57

Deindividuation

29.0K
Deindividuation is a form of social influence on an individual’s behavior such that the individual engages in unusual or non-normal behavior while in a group setting. Why? Because in these group settings, the individual no longer sees themselves as an individual anymore, disinhibiting their behavior and personal restraint.
29.0K

You might also read

Related Articles

Articles linked to this work by shared authors, journal, and citation graph.

Sort by
Same journal

Optimal impartial correspondences.

Social choice and welfare·2026
Same journal

Campaign contributions and policy divergence.

Social choice and welfare·2026
Same journal

The impact of timing and type of donation decision on charitable giving.

Social choice and welfare·2025
Same journal

Characterizing the top trading cycles rule for housing markets with lexicographic preferences when externalities are limited.

Social choice and welfare·2025
Same journal

Natural interviewing equilibria in matching settings.

Social choice and welfare·2025
Same journal

Approval-based shortlisting.

Social choice and welfare·2025
JoVE
x logofacebook logolinkedin logoyoutube logo
ABOUT JoVE
OverviewLeadershipBlogJoVE Help Center
AUTHORS
Publishing ProcessEditorial BoardScope & PoliciesPeer ReviewFAQSubmit
LIBRARIANS
TestimonialsSubscriptionsAccessResourcesLibrary Advisory BoardFAQ
RESEARCH
JoVE JournalMethods CollectionsJoVE Encyclopedia of ExperimentsArchive
EDUCATION
JoVE CoreJoVE BusinessJoVE Science EducationJoVE Lab ManualFaculty Resource CenterFaculty Site
Terms & Conditions of Use
Privacy Policy
Policies

Related Experiment Video

Updated: Nov 11, 2025

The Collective Trust Game: An Online Group Adaptation of the Trust Game Based on the HoneyComb Paradigm
06:18

The Collective Trust Game: An Online Group Adaptation of the Trust Game Based on the HoneyComb Paradigm

Published on: October 20, 2022

2.3K

Collective decision under ignorance.

Takashi Hayashi1

  • 1Adam Smith Business School, University of Glasgow, Glasgow, UK.

Social Choice and Welfare
|March 24, 2021
PubMed
Summary

This study explores preference aggregation under ignorance, finding that the Pareto axiom leads to dictatorship in maximin and $\epsilon$-maximin models. Researchers must either abandon social precautionary principles or relax the Pareto axiom.

Area of Science:

  • Decision Theory
  • Social Choice Theory
  • Economics

Background:

  • Preference aggregation under ignorance presents challenges for social decision-making.
  • Existing models often struggle to balance individual rationality with collective outcomes when uncertainty is high.

Purpose of the Study:

  • To analyze preference aggregation under ignorance using maximin and $\epsilon$-maximin criteria.
  • To investigate the implications of the Pareto axiom within these precautionary decision models.
  • To identify trade-offs between social precautionary principles and the Pareto axiom.

Main Methods:

  • Formal analysis of decision models under uncertainty.
  • Application of the maximin and $\epsilon$-maximin criteria.
  • Examination of the Pareto axiom's role in preference aggregation.

More Related Videos

The HoneyComb Paradigm for Research on Collective Human Behavior
06:48

The HoneyComb Paradigm for Research on Collective Human Behavior

Published on: January 19, 2019

9.6K
The Adventures of Fundi Intervention Based on the Cognitive and Emotional Processing in Attention Deficit Hyperactive Disorder Patients
05:48

The Adventures of Fundi Intervention Based on the Cognitive and Emotional Processing in Attention Deficit Hyperactive Disorder Patients

Published on: June 12, 2020

6.0K

Related Experiment Videos

Last Updated: Nov 11, 2025

The Collective Trust Game: An Online Group Adaptation of the Trust Game Based on the HoneyComb Paradigm
06:18

The Collective Trust Game: An Online Group Adaptation of the Trust Game Based on the HoneyComb Paradigm

Published on: October 20, 2022

2.3K
The HoneyComb Paradigm for Research on Collective Human Behavior
06:48

The HoneyComb Paradigm for Research on Collective Human Behavior

Published on: January 19, 2019

9.6K
The Adventures of Fundi Intervention Based on the Cognitive and Emotional Processing in Attention Deficit Hyperactive Disorder Patients
05:48

The Adventures of Fundi Intervention Based on the Cognitive and Emotional Processing in Attention Deficit Hyperactive Disorder Patients

Published on: June 12, 2020

6.0K

Main Results:

  • The Pareto axiom leads to dictatorship in both maximin and $\epsilon$-maximin models under ignorance.
  • Impossibility results arise from combining the Pareto axiom with these precautionary principles.
  • The study highlights a fundamental conflict between social precaution and the Pareto principle.

Conclusions:

  • Decision-making under ignorance requires a choice between upholding social precautionary principles or the Pareto axiom.
  • Relaxing the Pareto axiom or modifying social precautionary rules are potential solutions.
  • The findings offer insights into designing fair and rational decision processes in uncertain environments.