Collective Intelligence – problems and possibilities systems thinking, and computational thinking skills within individuals is im portant. • Technology can support the development

15/03/2012

1

Collective Intelligence –problems and possibilities

Michael Hogan

National University of Ireland, Galway

Table 1. Heuristic Maneuvers and their Reasoning Disadvantages

Developmental automaticity, heuristics, and intelligence

Name Cognitive Maneuver Disadvantage/RiskSatisficing and

Given an option that is good enough decide in favor of that

Good enough may not be best

y=1181.04+-191.576*log10(x)+eps

Dis

tinct

s T

arg

ets

400

800

1200

1600

2000

2400

and temporizing

enough, decide in favor of that option

best

Affect Take an initial stance in support of or in opposition to a given choice consistent with one’s initial affective response to that choice

Feelings may mislead

Simulation Estimate the likelihood of a given outcome based on one’s ease in imagining that outcome

Over-estimation of one’s chance of success or likelihood of failure

Availability Base the estimate of the likelihood of a future event on the vividness or ease of recalling a similar past event

Mistaken estimations of the chances of events turning out in the future as they are remembered

15/03/2012

2

IT, Information System, and Semantic Web supports

Developmental automaticity

Lanier argues:

1)The algorithm-driven direction of Web 2.0 is disempowering individuals and reducing the creativity of people online2)The social-semantic web is distorting human relationships and distancing people from true intimacy.

Lanier does not address social problem solving, or thepragmatic web. The pragmatic web uses the knowledgewithin the social network to facilitate problem solving.However,

• Collective intelligence within the pragmatic web can never be an exclusively algorithm-driven process; cultivating critical thinking, systems thinking, and computational thinking skills within individuals is important. p

• Technology can support the development of these thinking skills and facilitate collective intelligence and collective action

• The social psychology of collective action presents other real challenges (or problems) that require higher-order social-emotional intelligence

15/03/2012

3

John N. Warfield (1925-2009)

Warfield, past president of the society

Relevant Books

• 1976. Societal Systems: Planning, Policy, and Complexity. New York: Wiley Interscience. S f G C S

for systems science, developed Interactive Management

• 1990. A Science of Generic Design: Managing Complexity through Systems Design. Ames, IA: Iowa State University Press 1994.

• 1994. A Handbook of Interactive Management. With Roxana Cárdenas, Ames, IA: Iowa State University Press 1994.

• 2002. Understanding Complexity: Thought and Behavior. AJAR Publishing Company, Palm Harbor, FL.

• 2003. The Mathematics of Structure. AJAR Publishing Company, Palm Harbor, FL.• 2006. An introduction to systems science. Singapore: World Scientific.

People use different mental models to describe the same problematic situation.

Hofstadter’s integration of Gödel's Incompleteness Theorem, the music of Bach, and the art of Escher

Kurt Fischer (Harvard): People integrate at different levels of complexity

15/03/2012

4

Mathematical models can capture significant complexity but less often facilitate the resolution of social problems.

Jay Forrester’s World Model.

Forrester’s original World Model (1973) included 58 elements, 81 pair relations, and complex mathematical interdependencies.1. The model is quantitative, but includes many unstated qualitative assumptions. 2. The model is not the product of consensus and it is not presented in a way that can be readily understood by the public. 3. Many solutions can be generated depending on what assumptions are entered in a particular computer run. 4. Any decisions and solutions anticipated as a consequence of belief in the validity of the model would involve many individuals,

groups, and organizations to implement solutions.

When a group works to resolve a shared problem they need to build consensus models that facilitate collective action

Tools

MathematicsGraphicsWords

Mathematics of

logic and structure:eg., formal logic,

graph theory, matrices

Mathematics of content:e.g., differential equations,

integral equations used to describe

phenomena in physics, chemistry, biology,

psychology, sociology.

15/03/2012

5

What is Interactive Management?

• Integrated design process

B d i th th f t d i• Based in the theory of systems design

• Specifically developed for dealing with complex issues

• Goals are to help participants:– Develop understanding of the issues they face

– Establish collective basis for thinking and working cooperatively

– Produce framework for effective action.

Essential Components ofIM Process

1. Participants

2. Facilitation Team

3. Group Methodologies

4. Software Support

5. Productive Workshop Space

12

3

4 5

15/03/2012

6

Group Methodologies

1 Generating ideas1. Generating ideas

2. Categorizing

3. Structuring

4. Sequencing

5 Developing action agendas5. Developing action agendas

IM Methodologies aim to:

1. Prevent under-conceptualization

2. Avoid cognitive overload

3. Allow informed choice-making

4 Enable clear communication4. Enable clear communication

5. Promote positive group dynamics

15/03/2012

7

WhatWhat are barriers to ….

Step 1: Idea Generation

Step 2: Recording and posting ideas on display walls, and clarifying the meaning of ideas

15/03/2012

8

Problem set and problem categorisation

(3) Selection and ranking of sub-problems in the problem field

Statement Number of Sum of ranks Categoryvotes

2. Lack of clear incentives to 4 16 823 i i i 1023. Clashing personalities and 4 10 412. Challenge of identifying l 3 8 64. Lack of identity for the new 3 9 217. Uncertainty regarding new 2 7 225. Lack of reward systems to 2 6 89. Difficulty in defining clust 2 6 124. Unrecognized value of soci 2 7 25. Specialization (mitigates ag 2 6 57. Lack of clear language that 2 6 519. Overdependence on "bureauc 2 4 622. Some individuals want to w 2 2 43. Lack of motivation or intere 2 7 713. Lack of opportunity for fo 1 3 326. Turf issues: individuals w 1 5 432. Someone needs to commit si 1 4 620. Divergence in methods, pro 1 5 528. Not really an existing, re 1 4 333. Institute based on what we 1 2 614. Lack of information/certai 1 1 515. Lack of translation of res 1 2 8-----------------------------------------------------------------------

15/03/2012

9

(4) Structuring the interdependence between problems in the problem field

From voting, to matrix, to structure

Figure C-1 shows a Boolean matrix (i.e., a matrix, all of whose entries are either 0 or 1). Thematrix rows and columns are identically indexed, the index numbers ranging from 1 to 15. Such amatrix might represent the information provided to the computer by a group of participants, inwhich e.g., 15 problems are interrelated (or possibly 15 options, or 15 events, etc.). The entries inthe matrix could represent a mix of the answers to questions posed to the participants and theanswers inferred by the computer (using a property of relationships known as transitivity).

15/03/2012

10

Lack of clear incentives to work together and across disciplines (2)

(5) Group analysis of emergent influence structure

Turf issues: individuals want to maintain their distinctivness or be seen as the experts in an issue area (26)

O d d

Clashing personalities and histories (23)

Challenge of identifying leaders and mentors to drive/facilitate cluster, thematic

d i tit t l

Lack of motivation or interest in change (3)

Lack of identity for the new institute (4) Uncertainty regarding

d i

Specialization (mitigates against collaboration) (5)

Overdependence on "bureaucratic democracy" without vision and collective design (19)

and institute goals (12)

Difficulty in defining cluster objectives that align with national and EU priorities (9)

Unrecognized value of social sciences at NUI, Galway (24)

Divergence in methods, problem definition, outcomes, between disciplines (in/between clusters). (20)

new dynamics, management, activities, in moving beyond the past (old unit) and moving towards a new institute (17)

Lack of reward systems to work on real social problems - the challenge of bridging basic and applied research goals (25)

Lack of clear language that communicates with outside world and across disciplines (7)

Some individuals want to work alone rather than as part of a team (22)

(6) Generate options as a response to the structural problems

Multiple actors work in multiple directions

15/03/2012

11

Lack of ownership of the problem or the

Failure to remain focused on the topic (21){J}

Demand for quick resolution

d i l

• Conventional wisdom that groups or meetings are a waste of time (28)

Sample Influence Structure: Obstacles to Effective Communication in Group Problem Solving

o e p ob e o eobjective (58)

{E}

Non-conducive physical meeting environment

Inadequate process for facilitation (70)

Failure to allocate sufficient time to the group effort (24)

• Lack of clearly understood or agreed purpose (27)

• Failure to utilize appropriate

and singular solution (95)

{F}

• Failure to involve the head, heart, and body (76)•"Groupthink" (35)• Lack of trust among the members

Lack of cultural sensitivity (59)

•Domination of group discussion by strong personalities (14)

• Failure to suspend assumptions (48)

• (Refusal to recognize difference in mental models) (15)

• Lack of necessary or appropriate information (23)

• Hesitancy to bring out sensitive, undiscussable issues (13)

• Failure to involve correct people/stakeholders (37)

• Presence of e v o e(32)

{D}

(70)

{J}

Organizational politics inside and outside the group (101)

{F}

appropriate methodologies (102)

{D, C, A}

the members (6)

{H, J, H}

Lack of clarity on who is the client (63)

{C}

( )

{B}

es (14)

• Lack of effective communication norms (20)

{G, G}

{G, G}

hidden agendas or ulterior motives (9)

{F, D, H, E, I}

COMM 531Spring 1999 Design

SessionsUpdated 2/9/99

The Arrow Should be Interpreted as:

“Significantly Aggravates”

• Makes it more difficult to resolve

• Increases the Severity of

• Makes Worse

• Exacerbates

nt To promote in bothcommunities a better

• To empower Cypriots to envision a Cyprus where people live in peace andto believe that this is possible now (D-2)

• To learn to accept differences in culture and start thinking of them aspositive, interesting, and enriching factors (E-3)

• To work for an independent bicommunal bizonal federally united Cypruswith full respect to human needs and rights and develop the appropriate

• To promote the idea that the security problemof both communities could be lessened bydemilitarization (K-26)

• To come up with a solution that will satisfythe security needs of both communities (K-41)

• To minimize the effects of outside powers(K-29)

• To help build a country where everybody's needsare everybody's concern (E-1)

• To try and create a proper climate where TurkishCypriots will ask for Greek Cypriots whatever theywant for themselves and where G/Cs will refuseanything for T/Cs that they don't want forthemselves (D-10)

Col

lect

ive

Vis

ion

Sta

tem

en

To minimize the effects ofnational chauvinism andpromote the idea of a polyethnici l i f d l i t (G 14)

• To develop public confidence in the peace buildingprocess (A-4)

• To strengthen the peace movements on the citizenlevel (B-12)

• To promote the idea in G/C community that theexistence problem of T/C community is vital for thewhole of Cyprus (H-18)

communities a betterunderstanding ofbasic needs, fears, andaspirations of eachcommunityconcerning theproperty issue (H-17)

with full respect to human needs and rights and develop the appropriatepublic mentality to support it (K-43)

• To make known and acknowledge the basic needs, fears and aspirations ofeach community to the other community (H-21)

• To eliminate the "enemy image" (E-11)

• To stimulate the idea of freedom of movement throughout the island (K-19)

• To encourage youths of both communities to get to know each other (I-36)

• To accept and respect each others' identity as T/Cs and G/Cs and see this asa richness rather than an obstacle to peace building (G-32)

C

To buildbridges ofmutualempowermentand understandwith Track Ipeople (C-42)

• To provide opportunities for interaction between the two communities (I-8)

• To build intercommunal institutions and centers (I-9)

• To promote bi-communal commercial, health, educational and sports activities (I-15)

• To establish an effective bicommunal peace movement (B-30)

• To promote cultural and social relations between the two communities (C-16)

• To promote both communities working together on common projects (I-7)

• To build a climate in which the ethnic identities of the twocommunities are not threatened (G-6)

• To support in both communities the idea of joining theEuropean Union (K-28)

To try and find ways to bridge theeconomic differences between thetwo communities (K-37)

inclusive federal society (G-14) whole of Cyprus (H 18)

• To help the two communities create a common vision(H-27)

15/03/2012

12

15/03/2012

13

15/03/2012

14

Applications

IAS IASGovernment planningand policy and the

Individual as system IAS

Family/Smallgroup

Community problem solving

Relational trainingCooperative learning In schools

Universities(basic and applied science; Relational knowledge import; Web of knowledge)

Product designOrganizational design

and policy and the Wisdom of the crowd

g gBusiness management

Functional social networking

Google experiments(global research aided by google supportand google consultants)

Google G Earth(representation of groups and avatar transport)

Dynamic Groups(dynamic update of problem/option structures, group comparison, group merger)

Google rewards for groupparticipation

15/03/2012

15

Facilitating Cross-Cluster Connectivity

Economics of Health and Ageing Political Innovation

Health, Ageing and Lifespan Development

Applied Social Science

Sustainability GroupsPerformance Management

Agility

Group Decision Making

Systems Science Education• Problematiques generated in IM

sessions are like structural equation models (SEMs) without effect sizes included

• However, effect sizes can be imported for relations in IM structures and thus allow for model fit indices to be generated (i.e., computation science link).

• Also, each relation in an IM structure is a claim and the logic of argumentation linked to each claimargumentation linked to each claim can be worked out in an argument map (AM).

• AM training facilitates development of critical thinking skill. IM training facilitates development of systems thinking/action abilities. SEM develops computational skills.

15/03/2012

16

The Social Psychology of Effective Teams: The Big Five

1. Team Orientation – a preference for working with others and also a tendency to enhance individual performance through the coordination, evaluation, and utilization of task inputs from other members.

2. Mutual Performance Monitoring – Effective teams are comprised of members who maintain an awareness of team functioning by monitoring fellow members work in an effort to catch slips/mistakes

3 Backup Behaviour Management Ability to anticipate other team members needs through accurate3. Backup Behaviour Management – Ability to anticipate other team members needs through accurate knowledge about their responsibilities. Includes ability to shift workload among members to achieve balance during high periods of workload or pressure

4. Adaptability – Ability to adjust strategies based on information gathered from the environment and through the use of backup behaviour and reallocation of intra-team resources.

5. Team Leadership – Ability to direct and coordinate team activities, assess performance, assign tasks, develop team knowledge, skills, and abilities, motivate team members, plan and organize, and establish a positive atmosphere

Supporting Coordinating Mechanisms

A. Mutual Trust – The shared belief that team members will perform their roles and protect the interests of their teammates.

B. Shared Mental Models – An organizing knowledge structure of relationships among the task the team in engaged in and how the team members will interact

C. Closed-loop communication – The exchange of information between a sender and a receiver irrespective of the medium. Involves (a) the sender initiating a message, (b) the receiver receiving the message, interpreting it, and acknowledging its receipt, and (c) the sender following up to insure the intended message was received

15/03/2012

17

Small Group Research

Psychodynamics of ‘open’ versus ‘closed’ groups

• We asked two groups of student to map• We asked two groups of student to map interdependencies between the costs and benefits of online social media using IM.

• Participants were divided into high and low dispositional trust by means of a median split based on their pre-scores on dispositional trust.

• Participants high and low on trust were randomly assigned to open or closed voting group.

Results• Main effect of trust on perceived consensus, F(1,26) = 8.43, p =

.007, with perceived consensus higher in the high trust group (M =14 6 SD = 2 75) than in the low trust group (M =12 0 SD = 2 27)14.6, SD 2.75) than in the low trust group (M 12.0, SD 2.27). There was also a main effect of condition on perceived consensus, F(1,26) = 7.50, p = .011, with perceived consensus higher in the open group (M =14.53, SD = 2.53) than in the closed group (M =12.07, SD = 2.58).

• Main effect of trust level on perceived efficacy of IM, F(1,26) = 4.34, p = .047, with higher perceived efficacy in the high trust group (M = 23.27, SD = 4.40) than in the low trust group (M = 20.07, SD = 3 94) Also higher perceived efficacy in the open group (M =3.94). Also, higher perceived efficacy in the open group (M = 23.53, SD = 3.23) than in the closed group (M = 19.80, SD = 4.74).

• There was also a trend whereby trust scores tended be to lower in the low trust group after closed voting compared with after open voting.

15/03/2012

18

Finally

• We are developing new IM software that ill b il bl t d l ftwill be available as stand-alone software

and networked app.

• We aim to build capacity in IM use for basic and applied research purposes

• How might you use IM in your• How might you use IM in your basic/applied research work?