Note on unusual formatting: Sentences are split into lines so you can parse parts precisely.
The tendency to do (or believe) things because many other people do (or believe) the same.
While this is similar in effect to the ‘Availability Cascade’, this bias effect relates more specifically to the relation between ‘expert’ and ‘non-expert’ opinions, whereas Availability Cascade is more in relation to the arguments and discussions among experts who are knowledgeable and qualified enough to consider and assess the information directly.
The concern here is that once the general non-expert public has been drawn into accepting a given proposal, proposition, or belief, the apparent boundary between
the opinions resulting from real evaluations; and;
the opinions resulting from people simply quoting other people,
… becomes very blurred.
This means that it is no longer possible for any party, regardless of all other factors, to easily tell if the analysis and evaluation has been independently replicated/validated, or is merely being quoted, copied from one person to another. The net effect is that it becomes increasingly difficult to determine if the actual strength of the evaluation itself is due to multiple concordant validations, or that validation strength is actually absent.
If most people are simply copying their results from someone else, that means we are all equally likely to have the same incorrect or incomplete answer. This can easily lead to a false sense of security: everyone believes we are safe because everyone else believes we are safe – a result that could easily become completely detached from any sort of objective real basis or evaluative grounding.
- link Wikipedia: Bandwagon effect - an item on Forrest Landry’s compiled list of biases in evaluating extinction risks.
Bandwagon effect: Bias in Evaluating AGI X-Risks
Note on unusual formatting: Sentences are split into lines so you can parse parts precisely.
The tendency to do (or believe) things
because many other people do (or believe) the same.
While this is similar in effect
to the ‘Availability Cascade’,
this bias effect relates
more specifically to the relation
between ‘expert’ and ‘non-expert’ opinions,
whereas Availability Cascade is more in relation
to the arguments and discussions among experts
who are knowledgeable and qualified
enough to consider and assess
the information directly.
The concern here is that
once the general non-expert public
has been drawn into accepting
a given proposal, proposition, or belief,
the apparent boundary between
the opinions resulting from
real evaluations; and;
the opinions resulting from
people simply quoting other people,
… becomes very blurred.
This means that it is
no longer possible for any party,
regardless of all other factors,
to easily tell if the analysis and evaluation
has been independently replicated/validated,
or is merely being quoted, copied
from one person to another.
The net effect is that it becomes
increasingly difficult to determine if
the actual strength of the evaluation itself
is due to multiple concordant validations,
or that validation strength is actually absent.
If most people are simply copying
their results from someone else,
that means we are all equally likely
to have the same incorrect
or incomplete answer.
This can easily lead
to a false sense of security:
everyone believes we are safe
because everyone else believes we are safe
– a result that could easily become
completely detached from any
sort of objective real basis
or evaluative grounding.
- link Wikipedia: Bandwagon effect
- an item on Forrest Landry’s compiled list of biases in evaluating extinction risks.