Independent Experts More Effective Than Collective Expertise in Decision-Making Under Uncertainty
.jpg "Independent Experts More Effective Than Collective Expertise in Decision-Making Under Uncertainty")
A collaborative study by Sergey Stepanov, Associate Professor at the HSE Faculty of Economic Sciences and ICEF, and experts from INSEAD Business School and NYU Shanghai, indicates that in making decisions under high uncertainty, where it is unclear which choice is superior, advice from independent experts may be more beneficial than a collective opinion from a group of experts. The study has been published in Games and Economic Behavior.
In real-life situations, decision-makers often face the dilemma of whether to rely on the opinions of multiple independent experts or opt for collective consultation. Independent expert opinions are common in fields such as science and medicine—for instance, when reviewing papers for academic journals, multiple experts independently provide their feedback without knowing the identities of the other reviewers. Examples of collective expertise include meetings of directors, think tanks, commissions, and advisory boards, where solutions are discussed and assessed by experts working together as a team.
To determine when it may be more effective to rely on independent expert opinions versus a collective assessment, the researchers developed a model featuring several hypothetical experts who have received information about the situation but may interpret it in different ways. Each expert's goal is to convince the decision-maker of their competence by providing the most accurate forecast possible. The model envisioned two scenarios: independent expertise, where the experts were unaware of each other's involvement, and collective expertise, where they could discuss the information before presenting a unified opinion.
In the model, whether the experts express their true opinions is influenced by their reputation concerns. When a particular option is considered the most likely to be the right choice a priori, an independent expert may hesitate to contradict this prior opinion. But when acting as a group, individuals can first share opinions among themselves and thus reinforce their doubts if many experts have those, allowing the group to provide a more accurate response in such situations. Where an individual expert might refrain from speaking out, a group can persuade management to adopt a different perspective if it appears more suitable.
The study's findings indicate that the effectiveness of either approach depends on the level of certainty in the situation. In conditions of certainty, where the likelihood of success for each option is relatively well understood, a collective approach facilitates the gathering of more data and the development of a unified solution. By collaboratively discussing and analysing information, a team of experts can reach more accurate conclusions and reduce disagreements.
However, independent expertise is more effective in challenging and unpredictable situations. When it is unclear what is right a priori, an individual expert is not afraid of expressing their true opinion. This approach also helps prevent the influence of groupthink, where experts feel compelled to conform to the majority opinion. Hence, in contrast to the collective expertise, independent experts will be able to credibly communicate disagreements among them, which is valuable for choosing the optimal decision.
By 'high uncertainty,' the researchers refer to situations where there is no clear or widely accepted understanding of the potential outcome. These may include unconventional economic forecasts, unstable political situations, unfamiliar medical cases, and other scenarios that require flexibility and a non-standard approach to assessment.
'The study's findings can reshape our understanding of whether collective or independent advice is more effective. For a decision-maker, this choice does not depend on their personal preferences,' according to Sergey Stepanov, Associate Professor at the Faculty of Economic Sciences.
When it is unclear what choice is correct a priori, , independent experts can provide a more objective opinion. This can be observed, for instance, when surveying economists for forecasts on inflation or GDP growth, where the complexity of economic processes makes it impossible to determine a single 'correct' opinion in advance. The mass media, think tanks, and government agencies conduct such surveys among various experts to obtain a comprehensive assessment of the situation.
'In some cases, we can choose whether to consult an independent expert or seek advice from a group of experts,' Sergey Stepanov believes. 'For example, when making a complex medical diagnosis, one can either consult several medical experts independently or convene a medical case conference. Both of these approaches can be effective.'
Thus, according to the authors, the choice between independent and collective expertise depends on the specific situation, its complexity, and the available data.
See also:
Scientists Test Asymmetry Between Matter and Antimatter
An international team, including scientists from HSE University, has collected and analysed data from dozens of experiments on charm mixing—the process in which an unstable charm meson oscillates between its particle and antiparticle states. These oscillations were observed only four times per thousand decays, fully consistent with the predictions of the Standard Model. This indicates that no signs of new physics have yet been detected in these processes, and if unknown particles do exist, they are likely too heavy to be observed with current equipment. The paper has been published in Physical Review D.
HSE Scientists Reveal What Drives Public Trust in Science
Researchers at HSE ISSEK have analysed the level of trust in scientific knowledge in Russian society and the factors shaping attitudes and perceptions. It was found that trust in science depends more on everyday experience, social expectations, and the perceived promises of science than on objective knowledge. The article has been published in Universe of Russia.
Scientists Uncover Why Consumers Are Reluctant to Pay for Sugar-Free Products
Researchers at the HSE Institute for Cognitive Neuroscience have investigated how 'sugar-free' labelling affects consumers’ willingness to pay for such products. It was found that the label has little impact on the products’ appeal due to a trade-off between sweetness and healthiness: on the one hand, the label can deter consumers by implying an inferior taste, while on the other, it signals potential health benefits. The study findings have been published in Frontiers in Nutrition.
HSE Psycholinguists Launch Digital Tool to Spot Dyslexia in Children
Specialists from HSE University's Centre for Language and Brain have introduced LexiMetr, a new digital tool for diagnosing dyslexia in primary school students. This is the first standardised application in Russia that enables fast and reliable assessment of children’s reading skills to identify dyslexia or the risk of developing it. The application is available on the RuStore platform and runs on Android tablets.
Physicists Propose New Mechanism to Enhance Superconductivity with 'Quantum Glue'
A team of researchers, including scientists from HSE MIEM, has demonstrated that defects in a material can enhance, rather than hinder, superconductivity. This occurs through interaction between defective and cleaner regions, which creates a 'quantum glue'—a uniform component that binds distinct superconducting regions into a single network. Calculations confirm that this mechanism could aid in developing superconductors that operate at higher temperatures. The study has been published in Communications Physics.
Neural Network Trained to Predict Crises in Russian Stock Market
Economists from HSE University have developed a neural network model that can predict the onset of a short-term stock market crisis with over 83% accuracy, one day in advance. The model performs well even on complex, imbalanced data and incorporates not only economic indicators but also investor sentiment. The paper by Tamara Teplova, Maksim Fayzulin, and Aleksei Kurkin from the Centre for Financial Research and Data Analytics at the HSE Faculty of Economic Sciences has been published in Socio-Economic Planning Sciences.
Larger Groups of Students Use AI More Effectively in Learning
Researchers at the Institute of Education and the Faculty of Economic Sciences at HSE University have studied what factors determine the success of student group projects when they are completed with the help of artificial intelligence (AI). Their findings suggest that, in addition to the knowledge level of the team members, the size of the group also plays a significant role—the larger it is, the more efficient the process becomes. The study was published in Innovations in Education and Teaching International.
New Models for Studying Diseases: From Petri Dishes to Organs-on-a-Chip
Biologists from HSE University, in collaboration with researchers from the Kulakov National Medical Research Centre for Obstetrics, Gynecology, and Perinatology, have used advanced microfluidic technologies to study preeclampsia—one of the most dangerous pregnancy complications, posing serious risks to the life and health of both mother and child. In a paper published in BioChip Journal, the researchers review modern cellular models—including advanced placenta-on-a-chip technologies—that offer deeper insights into the mechanisms of the disorder and support the development of effective treatments.
Using Two Cryptocurrencies Enhances Volatility Forecasting
Researchers from the HSE Faculty of Economic Sciences have found that Bitcoin price volatility can be effectively predicted using Ethereum, the second-most popular cryptocurrency. Incorporating Ethereum into a predictive model reduces the forecast error to 23%, outperforming neural networks and other complex algorithms. The article has been published in Applied Econometrics.
Administrative Staff Are Crucial to University Efficiency—But Only in Teaching-Oriented Institutions
An international team of researchers, including scholars from HSE University, has analysed how the number of non-academic staff affects a university’s performance. The study found that the outcome depends on the institution’s profile: in research universities, the share of administrative and support staff has no effect on efficiency, whereas in teaching-oriented universities, there is a positive correlation. The findings have been published in Applied Economics.