Abstract

A crucial challenge for organizations is to pool and aggregate information effectively. Traditionally, organizations have relied on committees and teams, but recently many organizations have explored the use of information markets. In this paper, the authors compared groups and markets in their ability to pool and aggregate information in a hidden-profiles task. In Study 1, groups outperformed markets when there were no conflicts of interest among participants, whereas markets outperformed groups when conflicts of interest were present. Also, participants had more trust in groups to uncover hidden profiles than in markets. Study 2 generalized these findings to a simple prediction task, confirming that people had more trust in groups than in markets. These results were not qualified by conflicts of interest. Drawing on experienced forecasters from Good Judgment Open, Study 3 found that familiarity and experience with markets increased the endorsement and use of markets relative to traditional committees.

Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call