Jove
Visualize
Contact Us
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 Concept Videos

Decision Making: Traditional Method01:14

Decision Making: Traditional Method

5.8K
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...
5.8K
Decision Making: P-value Method01:09

Decision Making: P-value Method

7.2K
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...
7.2K
Decision Making01:20

Decision Making

1.2K
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...
1.2K
Reason and Intuition01:37

Reason and Intuition

7.7K
The human brain processes information for decision-making using one of two routes: an intuitive system and a rational system (Epstein, 1994; popularized by Kahneman, 2011 as System 1 and System 2, respectively). The intuitive system is quick, impulsive, and operates with minimal effort, relying on emotions or habits to provide cues for what to do next, while the rational system is logical, analytical, deliberate, and methodical. Research in neuropsychology suggests that the...
7.7K
Optimal Foraging00:48

Optimal Foraging

14.2K
How animals obtain and eat their food is called foraging behavior. Foraging can include searching for plants and hunting for prey and depends on the species and environment.
14.2K
Groupthink01:34

Groupthink

50.3K
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...
50.3K

You might also read

Related Articles

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

Sort by
Same author

Sensory horizons, reality monitoring, and the higher-order nature of consciousness: A critical look.

The Behavioral and brain sciences·2026
Same author

Confidence in naturalistic decision making.

Neuroscience of consciousness·2026
Same author

How foundation models will revolutionize robot swarms.

Science robotics·2026
Same author

Frequency-tagging as a measure of conscious face perception.

Cortex; a journal devoted to the study of the nervous system and behavior·2026
Same author

Exploring the role of micro-valence in the phenomenal space: insights from similarity judgments and deep learning models.

Neuroscience of consciousness·2026
Same author

Replicating the unconscious working memory effect: a multisite Registered Report.

Neuroscience of consciousness·2026
Same journal

Mental health of healthcare workers in England during the first three years of the COVID-19 pandemic: The NHS CHECK study cohort.

PloS one·2026
Same journal

Research on trajectory tracking control of tracked vehicles based on hydraulic motor system identification and Laguerre-MPC.

PloS one·2026
Same journal

A collaborative cervical precancer screening strategy with concurrent HPV genotyping and visual inspection using alumni of a training centre across Ghana: The Rotary 'Protect Your Pearl' initiative.

PloS one·2026
Same journal

Removal efficiency of pesticide residues on pesticide-spiked Perilla Leaf and Broccoli surfaces using microplasma-treated water.

PloS one·2026
Same journal

Cross-domain zero-shot semantic segmentation for unstructured environments via EVA-CLIP model, ensemble prompt engineering, and optimized text-image matching.

PloS one·2026
Same journal

Adaptive robust sparse representation for face recognition based on weighted and fusion dictionary.

PloS one·2026
See all related articles

Related Experiment Video

Updated: Apr 5, 2026

Operant Protocols for Assessing the Cost-benefit Analysis During Reinforced Decision Making by Rodents
07:05

Operant Protocols for Assessing the Cost-benefit Analysis During Reinforced Decision Making by Rodents

Published on: September 10, 2018

6.6K

Best-of-n decision making by human groups.

Nicolas Coucke1,2,3, Marco Dorigo1, Axel Cleeremans2

  • 1IRIDIA, Université Libre de Bruxelles, Brussels, Belgium.

Plos One
|April 3, 2026
PubMed
Summary
This summary is machine-generated.

Human groups in a virtual reality experiment made collective decisions without speaking, similar to social insects. Informed minorities improved group consensus speed and accuracy.

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

9.9K
An Automated T-maze Based Apparatus and Protocol for Analyzing Delay- and Effort-based Decision Making in Free Moving Rodents
07:42

An Automated T-maze Based Apparatus and Protocol for Analyzing Delay- and Effort-based Decision Making in Free Moving Rodents

Published on: August 2, 2018

14.5K

Related Experiment Videos

Last Updated: Apr 5, 2026

Operant Protocols for Assessing the Cost-benefit Analysis During Reinforced Decision Making by Rodents
07:05

Operant Protocols for Assessing the Cost-benefit Analysis During Reinforced Decision Making by Rodents

Published on: September 10, 2018

6.6K
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

9.9K
An Automated T-maze Based Apparatus and Protocol for Analyzing Delay- and Effort-based Decision Making in Free Moving Rodents
07:42

An Automated T-maze Based Apparatus and Protocol for Analyzing Delay- and Effort-based Decision Making in Free Moving Rodents

Published on: August 2, 2018

14.5K

Area of Science:

  • Behavioral Ecology
  • Social Psychology
  • Virtual Reality Studies

Background:

  • Collective decision-making is crucial in animal and human groups, often involving consensus on the best option using evidence.
  • Human collective behavior studies typically lack the embodied, nonverbal scenarios common in animal research.

Purpose of the Study:

  • To investigate human collective decision-making in an embodied, nonverbal virtual environment mimicking animal nest-site selection.
  • To analyze how perceptual difficulty, information availability, and social dynamics influence consensus formation.

Main Methods:

  • Groups of up to 10 participants used a 3D virtual environment to select the largest of four sites without verbal communication.
  • Movement-based interactions and observations of empirical features guided consensus in the online multi-participant experiment.

Main Results:

  • Consensus speed and accuracy were significantly affected by perceptual difficulty and information availability, with no speed-accuracy trade-off observed.
  • Participants adapted their use of social information based on task difficulty, location, and time invested in an option.
  • A minority of informed individuals independently influenced the group towards faster and more accurate consensus.

Conclusions:

  • Human collective decision-making can be effectively studied in nonverbal, embodied virtual environments, offering parallels to social insects.
  • Group decision strategies flexibly adapt to environmental and social factors, highlighting the importance of information integration.
  • Informed minorities play a key role in enhancing group efficiency and accuracy in collective decision-making scenarios.