Jove
Visualize
Contáctanos
JoVE
x logofacebook logolinkedin logoyoutube logo
ACERCA DE JoVE
Visión GeneralLiderazgoBlogCentro de Ayuda JoVE
AUTORES
Proceso de PublicaciónConsejo EditorialAlcance y PolíticasRevisión por ParesPreguntas FrecuentesEnviar
BIBLIOTECARIOS
TestimoniosSuscripcionesAccesoRecursosConsejo Asesor de BibliotecasPreguntas Frecuentes
INVESTIGACIÓN
JoVE JournalMethods CollectionsJoVE Encyclopedia of ExperimentsArchivo
EDUCACIÓN
JoVE CoreJoVE BusinessJoVE Science EducationJoVE Lab ManualCentro de Recursos para ProfesoresSitio de Profesores
Términos y Condiciones de Uso
Política de Privacidad
Políticas

Videos de Conceptos Relacionados

Case Studies01:22

Case Studies

There are many research methods available to psychologists in their efforts to understand, describe, and explain behavior and the cognitive and biological processes that underlie it.
Reason and Intuition01:37

Reason and Intuition

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 brain can only use...
Groupthink01:34

Groupthink

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...
Cerebral Hemispheres01:05

Cerebral Hemispheres

The human brain, a complex organ, is functionally divided into two cerebral hemispheres—left and right. These hemispheres are interconnected by a structure of paramount importance, the corpus callosum. This substantial bundle of neural fibers is not just a bridge between the hemispheres but a crucial element for the brain's comprehensive functioning. It enables efficient communication between the two hemispheres, allowing each side of the brain to control and receive sensory and motor...
Factorial Design02:01

Factorial Design

Factorial Analysis is an experimental design that applies Analysis of Variance (ANOVA) statistical procedures to examine a change in a dependent variable due to more than one independent variable, also known as factors. Changes in worker productivity can be reasoned, for example, to be influenced by salary and other conditions, such as skill level. One way to test this hypothesis is by categorizing salary into three levels (low, moderate, and high) and skills sets into two levels (entry level...
Relationship Formation02:12

Relationship Formation

What do you think is the single most influential factor in determining with whom you become friends and whom you form romantic relationships? You might be surprised to learn that the answer is simple: the people with whom you have the most contact. This most important factor is proximity. You are more likely to be friends with people you have regular contact with. For example, there are decades of research that shows that you are more likely to become friends with people who live in your dorm,...

También podría leer

Artículos Relacionados

Artículos vinculados a este trabajo por autores compartidos, revista y gráfico de citas.

Ordenar por
Same author

Confidence judgments, feelings of knowing and judgments of learning: Towards a common framework.

Memory & cognition·2026
Same author

Subjective Confidence as a Monitor of the Replicability of the Response.

Perspectives on psychological science : a journal of the Association for Psychological Science·2024
Same author

Subjective Confidence in the Response to Personality Questions: Some Insight Into the Construction of People's Responses to Test Items.

Frontiers in psychology·2020
Same author

When reality is out of focus: Can people tell whether their beliefs and judgments are correct or wrong?

Journal of experimental psychology. General·2018
Same author

The Prototypical Majority Effect Under Social Influence.

Personality & social psychology bulletin·2018
Same author

Agency attributions of mental effort during self-regulated learning.

Memory & cognition·2017

Video Experimental Relacionado

Updated: May 23, 2026

Symmetric Bihemispheric Postmortem Brain Cutting to Study Healthy and Pathological Brain Conditions in Humans
08:29

Symmetric Bihemispheric Postmortem Brain Cutting to Study Healthy and Pathological Brain Conditions in Humans

Published on: December 18, 2016

¿Cuándo son dos cabezas mejores que una y por qué?

Asher Koriat1

  • 1Department of Psychology and Institute of Information Processing and Decision Making, University of Haifa, Haifa 31905, Israel. akoriat@research.haifa.ac.il

Science (New York, N.Y.)
|April 21, 2012
PubMed
Resumen

Dos cabezas son mejores que una, pero sólo si se comunican. Confiar en el individuo más confiado en un grupo puede conducir a peores decisiones cuando la mayoría de la gente está equivocada.

Área de la Ciencia:

  • Psicología Cognitiva Psicología cognitiva.
  • Psicología social Psicología social.
  • Ciencias de la decisión Ciencias de la decisión.

Sus antecedentes:

  • La toma de decisiones en grupo a menudo supera el juicio individual.
  • La libre comunicación y la confianza compartida son factores clave en la eficacia del grupo.
  • La confianza subjetiva es un elemento crucial para comprender la exactitud del juicio.

Objetivo del estudio:

  • Investigar si los beneficios de la toma de decisiones en grupo pueden replicarse sin interacción directa.
  • Examinar el papel de la confianza subjetiva en la precisión individual frente a la precisión del grupo.
  • Determinar las condiciones bajo las cuales las decisiones de grupo son superiores a las individuales.

Principales métodos:

  • Replicación de un estudio de "dos cabezas son mejores que una" utilizando una tarea de percepción.

Más Videos Relacionados

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

Videos de Experimentos Relacionados

Last Updated: May 23, 2026

Symmetric Bihemispheric Postmortem Brain Cutting to Study Healthy and Pathological Brain Conditions in Humans
08:29

Symmetric Bihemispheric Postmortem Brain Cutting to Study Healthy and Pathological Brain Conditions in Humans

Published on: December 18, 2016

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

  • Se emplearon díadas virtuales, eliminando la comunicación directa.
  • Selección de la decisión del miembro más seguro en cada juicio.
  • Análisis de la exactitud de la decisión basada en los niveles de confianza y las tasas de error.

    • Principales resultados:

    • La confianza en el miembro más seguro replicó el efecto "dos cabezas son mejores que una".
    • Cuando la mayoría cometió un error, la decisión del miembro más seguro condujo a resultados peores que la mejor decisión individual.
    • La confianza subjetiva se correlaciona con el consenso, pero no necesariamente con la exactitud.

    Conclusiones:

    • Los beneficios de la toma de decisiones en grupo no dependen únicamente de la comunicación directa.
    • La heurística del "miembro más seguro" puede ser perjudicial cuando el consenso se basa en un error generalizado.
    • Comprender la relación entre la confianza, el consenso y la precisión es vital para optimizar el rendimiento del grupo.