Books for Prep | |
by: James Surowiecki  List Price: $14.95 Amazon.com's Price: $10.17 You Save: $4.78 (32%)Prices subject to change. Availability: Usually ships in 24 hours
This item ships for FREE with Super Saver Shipping.
Binding: PaperbackDewey Decimal Number: 303.38 EAN: 9780385721707 ISBN: 0385721706 Label: Anchor Manufacturer: Anchor Number Of Items: 1 Number Of Pages: 336 Publication Date: August 16, 2005 Publisher: Anchor Release Date: August 16, 2005 Studio: Anchor Related Items:
Browse for similar items by category: Click to Display Editorial Review: Product Description: In this fascinating book, New Yorker business columnist James Surowiecki explores a deceptively simple idea: Large groups of people are smarter than an elite few, no matter how brilliant–better at solving problems, fostering innovation, coming to wise decisions, even predicting the future. With boundless erudition and in delightfully clear prose, Surowiecki ranges across fields as diverse as popular culture, psychology, ant biology, behavioral economics, artificial intelligence, military history, and politics to show how this simple idea offers important lessons for how we live our lives, select our leaders, run our companies, and think about our world. Download Description: The Wisdom of Crowds I If, years hence, people remember anything about the TV game show Who Wants to Be a Millionaire?, they will probably remember the contestants' panicked phone calls to friends and relatives. Or they may have a faint memory of that short-lived moment when Regis Philbin became a fashion icon for his willingness to wear a dark blue tie with a dark blue shirt. What people probably won't remember is that every week Who Wants to Be a Millionaire? pitted group intelligence against individual intelligence, and that every week, group intelligence won. Who Wants to Be a Millionaire? was a simple show in terms of structure: a contestant was asked multiple-choice questions, which got successively more difficult, and if she answered fifteen questions in a row correctly, she walked away with $1 million. The show's gimmick was that if a contestant got stumped by a question, she could pursue three avenues of assistance. First, she could have two of the four multiple-choice answers removed (so she'd have at least a fifty-fifty shot at the right response). Second, she could place a call to a friend or relative, a person whom, before the show, she had singled out as one of the smartest people she knew, and ask him or her for the answer. And third, she could poll the studio audience, which would immediately cast its votes by computer. Everything we think we know about intelligence suggests that the smart individual would offer the most help. And, in fact, the "experts" did okay, offering the right answer--under pressure--almost 65 percent of the time. But they paled in comparison to the audiences. Those random crowds of people with nothing better to do on a weekday afternoon than sit in a TV studio picked the right answer 91 percent of the time. Now, the results of Who Wants to Be a Millionaire? would never stand up to scientific scrutiny. We don't know how smart the experts were, so we don't know how impressive outperforming them was. And since the experts and the audiences didn't always answer the same questions, it's possible, though not likely, that the audiences were asked easier questions. Even so, it's hard to resist the thought that the success of the Millionaire audience was a modern example of the same phenomenon that Francis Galton caught a glimpse of a century ago. As it happens, the possibilities of group intelligence, at least when it came to judging questions of fact, were demonstrated by a host of experiments conducted by American sociologists and psychologists between 1920 and the mid-1950s, the heyday of research into group dynamics. Although in general, as we'll see, the bigger the crowd the better, the groups in most of these early experiments--which for some reason remained relatively unknown outside of academia--were relatively small. Yet they nonetheless performed very well. The Columbia sociologist Hazel Knight kicked things off with a series of studies in the early 1920s, the first of which had the virtue of simplicity. In that study Knight asked the students in her class to estimate the room's temperature, and then took a simple average of the estimates. The group guessed 72.4 degrees, while the actual temperature was 72 degrees. This was not, to be sure, the most auspicious beginning, since classroom temperatures are so stable that it's hard to imagine a class's estimate being too far off base. But in the years that followed, far more convincing evidence emerged, as students and soldiers across America were subjected to a barrage of puzzles, intelligence tests, and word games. The sociologist Kate H. Gordon asked two hundred students to rank items by weight, and found that the group's "estimate" was 94 percent accurate, which was better than all but five of the individual guesses. In another experiment students were asked to look at ten piles of buckshot--each a slightly different size than the Average Rating:
 Rating: - Never judge a book by its cover!I have a confession to make. I started reviewing this book before reading it, based purely on the rather lengthy subtitle `Why the Many Are Smarter than the Few and How Collective Wisdom Shapes Business, Economies, Societies and Nations'. First, I planned to make a sneering reference to the dotcom bubble as evidence of this collective wisdom. Then, point to Charles Mackay's classic Extraordinary Popular Delusions and the Madness of Crowds. How sad that this ignorant journalist had pinched ... Read More Rating:  - Excellent PrimerThere's a reason why democracy is the crappiest form of government, except all others (to paraphrase somebody famous). The theme of this book is that groups of people are smarter than individual people. It's sort of counterintuitive to the American spirit of individualism, but James Surowiecki does a creditable job of providing a good case to support his thesis in a very readable format. Anyone who regularly works in problem-solving groups will immediately recognize the fundamental truth ... Read More Rating: - Groups of People are Smart!This author has done an outstanding job of proving his thesis that groups of people are smarter than the smartest person in the group. The book touches on markets, juries, and economics, and many more topics, furthering his main point. This book will persuade the reader that experts and loners do not make the best decisions, but groups of informed people do. Rating: - The Wisdom of The Wisdom of CrowdsThis fascinating book it based on a simple, but counterintuitive premise--that a crowd of diverse people will almost always be smarter than any single expert. That is, take a group of people, some who may be educated, some who may be experts, and some who may be completely misinformed, and let them each independently solve a problem. Then, if you can take the average solution, it will be close to correct. Moreover, it will be closer than almost everyone else in the group. It's basically a bell-curve of ... Read More Rating: - An Entry Level ReviewAfterthoughts: The title could have been "The Wisdom of One Man" because author James Surowiecki impressively exemplifies his theory - that large groups of people are collectively smarter than the smartest individuals themselves - through countless examples from past and present world affairs. Diverse and thought-provoking, Surowiecki's selection takes us from ocean floor to outer space, from a New Mexico bar to a field goal post, Detroit's first car to Zara's latest shipment, gangster films, traffic ... Read More 
In association with Amazon.com | |