SavedAdd your journal

Journals / Dokuz Eylül Üniversitesi İşletme Fakültesi Dergisi / 2026 / Cilt: 26 Sayı: 1

THE WISDOM OF CROWDS: A REALITY OR A FALLACY?

KİTLELERİN BİLGELİĞİ: BİR HAKÎKAT MIDIR YOKSA BİR SAFSATA MIDIR?

Ahmet Bardakcı(PAMUKKALE ÜNİVERSİTESİ)0000-0003-1391-6432
Murat Kantar(PAMUKKALE ÜNİVERSİTESİ)0000-0002-2251-1181
Nazan Madak Öztürk(PAMUKKALE ÜNİVERSİTESİ)0000-0003-1036-8442
Pages
133–153
Publication Date
2025-06-22
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

Furthermore, our findings provide support for anchoring effect.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:Galton’s (1907) and Coste’s (1907) contrasting arguments about the wisdom of the crowds have been examined for almost a century.
📊
Key Findings & Data:However, to the best of our knowledge, experimental studies reported in the literature usually focus on crowd’s independent forecasts’ accuracies.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:Furthermore, our findings provide support for anchoring effect.
🔬Design:Araştırma Makalesi
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:Kitlelerin Bilgeliği · Tercihlerin Bağımsızlığı · Çapalama Etkisi

Abstract

Galton’s (1907) and Coste’s (1907) contrasting arguments about the wisdom of the crowds have been examined for almost a century. However, to the best of our knowledge, experimental studies reported in the literature usually focus on crowd’s independent forecasts’ accuracies. Current study in contrast, examines the wisdom of the crowd’s argument by using non-independent forecasts’ accuracy as well as independent forecasts’ accuracy. Three experiments were conducted with students enrolled to Faculty of Economics and Administrative Sciences, Department of Business (English) and Department of International Trade and Finance of Pamukkale University. Our findings fail to support wisdom of crowds both for non-independent and independent samples. However, findings clearly indicates that individuals tend to be influenced by others while forecasting unfamiliar topics when they are given opportunity to realize others’ forecasts. Furthermore, our findings provide support for anchoring effect.

Özet

Galton (1907) ve Coste’nin (1907) kitlelerin bilgeliği hakkındaki birbirine zıt argümanları neredeyse bir asırdır araştırılmaktadır. Ancak bilebildiğimiz kadarıyla literatürde bildirilen deneysel çalışmalar çoğunlukla bağımsız tahminlere odaklanmaktadır. Bu çalışma kitlelerin bilgeliği argümanını; bağımsız ve bağımsız olmayan tahminleri kullanarak ele almaktadır. Bu çalışma kapsamında Pamukkale Üniversitesi İktisadi ve İdari Bilimler Fakültesi İşletme (İngilizce) ve Uluslararası Ticaret ve Finans bölümleri kayıtlı öğrencilerle üç deney yürütülmüştür. Bulgularımız hem bağımsız hem de bağımsız olmayan örneklemler için kitlenin bilgeliğine destek sağlamak konusunda başarısız olmuştur. Ancak bulgular, bilmedikleri konuları tahmin etmeye çalışan bireylere diğerlerinin tahminlerini görme fırsatı verildiğinde, başkalarının tahminlerinden etkilenme eğiliminde olduklarını açıkça göstermiştir. Bunun yanı sıra bulgular çapalama etkisine de destek sağlar niteliktedir.

🔖

Cite This Article

Bardakcı, A., Kantar, M., Öztürk, N. M. (2025). THE WISDOM OF CROWDS: A REALITY OR A FALLACY?. Dokuz Eylül Üniversitesi İşletme Fakültesi Dergisi, Cilt: 26 Sayı: 1, 133–153. https://doi.org/10.24889/ifede.1566582

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (41)

  1. Akyıldız, P. (2008). Tartışılan Boyutlarıyla “Homo Economicus”. Süleyman Demirel Üniversitesi İktisadi ve İdari Bilimler Fakültesi Dergisi, 13(2), 29-40.
  2. Almaatouq, A., Noriega-Campero, A., Alotaibi, A., Krafft, P. M., Moussaid, M., & Pentland, A. (2021). Adaptive social networks promote the wisdom of crowds. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 117(21), 11379-11386.
  3. Almaatouq, A., Rahimian, M., Burton, J. W., & Alhajri, A. (2020). When social influence promotes the wisdom of crowds. SSRN Electronic Journal.
  4. Ariely, D. (2008). Predictably Irrational: The Hidden Forces That Shape Our Decisions. 1st ed., Harper Collins, USA.
  5. Armstrong J.S. (1980). The Seer-Sucker Theory: The Value of Experts in Forecasting. Technology Review, 82(7), 16-24.
  6. Becker, J., Brackbill, D., & Centola, D. (2017). Network dynamics of social influence in the wisdom of crowds. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 114(26): E5070–E5076.
  7. Becker, J., Porter, E. and Centola, D. (2019). The wisdom of partisan crowds. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 116(22),10717–10722.
  8. Butler, D., Butler, R., & Eakins, J. (2021). Expert Performance and Crowd Wisdom: Evidence from English Premier League Predictions. European Journal of Operational Research, 288(1), 170-182.
  9. Coste P.F. H. (1907). The Ballot Box. Nature, March 2, 509.
  10. Da, Z., & Huang, X. (2020). Harnessing the Wisdom of Crowds. Management Science, 66(5), 1847-1867.
  11. DeWees, B., & Minson, J. A. (2018). The Right Way to Use the Wisdom of Crowds. Harvard Business Review, 20(December).
  12. Frey, V., & Van de Rijt, A. (2021). Social Influence Undermines the Wisdom of the Crowd in Sequential Decision Making. Management Science, 67(7), 4273–4286.
  13. Galton, F. (1907). The Ballot Box. Nature, March 21.
  14. Golub, B., & Jackson, M. O. (2010). Naive learning in social networks and the wisdom of crowds. American Economic Journal: Microeconomics, 2(1), 112-149.
  15. Grigg, A.E. (1958). Experience of Clinicians and Speech Characteristics and Statements of Clients as Variables in Clinical Judgment. Journal of Consulting Psychology, 22, 315-319.
  16. Gürçay, B., Mellers, B. A., & Baron, J. (2015). The Power of Social Influence on Estimation Accuracy. Journal of Behavioral Decision Making, 28(3), 250-261.
  17. IBM, (2024; 21 March). What is Collaborative Filtering?. E.T. 22.07.2024.https://www.ibm.com/topics/collaborative-filtering#:~:text=Collaborative%20filtering%20is%20an%20information,have%20interacted%20with%20that%20item.
  18. İhlas Haber Ajansı (2023). Sürekli ve Çember Halinde Dönen Koyunlar Kamerada: Çin’den Sonra Türkiye’de Görüldü, E.T. 16.02.2024 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UE48giACcoA
  19. Kahneman, D. (2011). Thinking, Fast and Slow. Farrar, Straus and Giroux: New York, USA.
  20. Karaman, G. (2016). Mesnevi’de Geçen “Tavuğun Yetiştirdiği Kaz Yavrularının Hikâyesi” ve “Ceylan Yavrusunun Eşeklerin Ahırına Hapsedilmesi” Hikâyesine Göre İnsan. Divan Edebiyatı Araştırmaları Dergisi, 17, 173-190.
  21. Kuran, T. (1995). Private Truths, Public Lies, The Social Consequences of Preference Falsification. Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA.
  22. Larrick, R.P., & Soll J.B. (2006). Intuitions About Combining Opinions: Misappreciation of the Averaging Principle. Management Science, 52(1), 111-127.
  23. Levy, B. I., & Ulman, E. (1967). Judging Psychopathology from Paintings. Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 72(2), 182–187.
  24. Lewis, A. R. (1975). The Venture of Islam: Conscience and History in a World Civilization Vol. 1: In Hodgson, M.G.S. (Edi) The Classical Age of Islam: Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
  25. Lorenz, J., Rauhut, H., Schweitzer, F., & Helbing, D. (2011). How Social Influence Can Undermine the Wisdom of Crowd Effect. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 108(22), 9020-9025.
  26. Mercier, H., & Claidière, N. (2022). Does Discussion Make Crowds Any Wiser? Cognition, 222, 104912.
  27. Milgram, S., Bickman, L., & Berkowit, L (1969). Note On the Drawing Power of Crowds of Different Size. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 13(2), 79-82.
  28. Morgan, M. G. (2014). Use (and abuse) of Expert Elicitation in Support of Decision Making for Public Policy. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 111(20), 7176-7184.
  29. Muchnik, L., Aral, S., & Taylor, S. J. (2013). Social Influence Bias: A randomized Experiment. Science, 341(6146), 647-651.
  30. Nyborg, K. (2000). Homo Economicus and Homo Politicus: Interpretation and Aggregation of Environmental Values. Journal of Economic Behavior and Organization, 42(3),305–322.
  31. Sherif, M. (1935). A Study of Some Social Factors in Perception. Archives of Psychology (Columbia University), 187(60).
  32. Simonson, I., & Rosen, E. (2014). Absolute Value: What Really Influences Customers in the Age of (Nearly) Perfect Information, Harper Business, New York.
  33. Surowiecki, J. (2005). The Wisdom of Crowds. Anchor Books, USA.
  34. Taft, R. (1955). The Ability to Judge People. Psychological Bulletin, 52, 1-28.
  35. Thaler, R. H. & Sunstein, C. R. (2008). Nudge: Improving Decisions about Health, Wealth and Happiness. Yale, London.
  36. Treynor, J. L. (1987). Market Efficiency and the Bean Jar Experiment. Financial Analysts Journal, 43(3), 50-53.
  37. Tversky, A., & Kahneman, D. (1974). Judgment under Uncertainty: Heuristics and Biases: Biases in judgments reveal some heuristics of thinking under uncertainty. Science, 185(4157), 1124-1131.
  38. Vermeule, A. (2009). Many-minds arguments in legal theory. Journal of Legal Analysis,1, 1.
  39. Wolfers, J., & Zitzewitz, E. (2004). Prediction Markets. Journal of Economic Perspectives, 18(2), 107-126.
  40. Yu, C., & Margolin, D. (2021). The Disproportion of Crowd Wisdom: The Impact of Status Seeking on Yelp Reviews. Plos One, 16(6).
  41. Yudiana, W. A., Ariyanti, M., & Alamsyah, A. (2019). “Wisdom of the Crowd” as Personalized Music Recommendation Model for Langit Musik Service. In 2019 International Conference on Information Management and Technology (ICIMTech) (1) 345-350). IEEE.