The Delphi Method on decision making

[dragulagu]

Fun trivia

Delphi is based on the principle that forecasts (or decisions) from a structured group of individuals are more accurate than those from unstructured groups.[6] The experts answer questionnaires in two or more rounds. After each round, a facilitator or change agent[7] provides an anonymised summary of the experts' forecasts from the previous round as well as the reasons they provided for their judgments. Thus, experts are encouraged to revise their earlier answers in light of the replies of other members of their panel. It is believed that during this process the range of the answers will decrease and the group will converge towards the "correct" answer. Finally, the process is stopped after a predefined stop criterion (e.g., number of rounds, achievement of consensus, stability of results), and the mean or median scores of the final rounds determine the results.[8]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Delphi_method

Delphic ambiguity is forecasting which is heavily qualified or subject to misinterpretation—a practice attributed to a oracle of Delphi, who answered a question by saying that a great empire would fall if Croesus crossed the River Halys, which was a logical step in his plan to attack the Persian Empire. Such ambiguities are often presumed intentional in their superficial appearance of providing more information than critical examination of their content would support—for example, that famous prophecy might be expected to "come true" whichever of those two respective kingdoms' armies was defeated in detail at the battle which in due course took place beyond that river.

 

[Krypton]

Funny you should mention this--I was reading about this in the context of the book Wisdom of Crowds awhile ago. Stuff like this concerns me somewhat as an individual who would like to make important decisions.

That said, I'm reading the first citation in that snippet and apparently studies haven't found much difference based on group size? Within a pretty small range for size, to be sure, but that at least would suggest it's less about collective brainpower than one might think.

It would be interesting to study what makes experts better performers in Delphi groups than others. I've heard it said that general curiousity has helped.