Acemoglu, Chernozhukov, and Yildiz. 2006.
“Learning and Disagreement in an Uncertain World.” Working Paper 12648.
Acemoglu, and Ozdaglar. 2011.
“Opinion Dynamics and Learning in Social Networks.” Dynamic Games and Applications.
Almaatouq, Rahimian, Burton, et al. 2021.
“When Social Influence Promotes the Wisdom of Crowds.” arXiv:2006.12471 [Physics, Stat].
Atanasov, Rescober, Stone, et al. 2015.
“Distilling the Wisdom of Crowds: Prediction Markets Versus Prediction Polls.” Academy of Management Proceedings.
Banerjee. 1992.
“A Simple Model of Herd Behavior.” The Quarterly Journal of Economics.
Board, and Meyer-ter-Vehn. 2021.
“Learning Dynamics in Social Networks.” Econometrica.
Danan, Gajdos, Hill, et al. 2016.
“Robust Social Decisions.” American Economic Review.
Farrell, and Shalizi. 2015.
“Pursuing Cognitive Democracy.” From Voice to Influence: Understanding Citizenship in a Digital Age; Allen, D., Light, J., Eds.
Garip. 2020.
“What Failure to Predict Life Outcomes Can Teach Us.” Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.
Golub, and Jackson. 2010.
“Naïve Learning in Social Networks and the Wisdom of Crowds.” American Economic Journal: Microeconomics.
Haghtalab, Jackson, and Procaccia. 2020.
“Belief Polarization in a Complex World: A Learning Theory Perspective.” SSRN Scholarly Paper ID 3606003.
Hertz, Romand-Monnier, Kyriakopoulou, et al. 2016.
“Social influence protects collective decision making from equality bias.” Journal of Experimental Psychology. Human Perception and Performance.
Jackson. 2009.
“Social Structure, Segregation, and Economic Behavior.” Presented as the Nancy Schwartz Memorial Lecture.
Klug, and Bagrow. 2016.
“Understanding the Group Dynamics and Success of Teams.” Royal Society Open Science.
Lalitha, Javidi, and Sarwate. 2014.
“Social Learning and Distributed Hypothesis Testing.” arXiv:1410.4307 [Cs, Math, Stat].
List, and Goodin. 2001.
“Epistemic Democracy: Generalizing the Condorcet Jury Theorem.” Journal of Political Philosophy.
Mahmoodi, Bang, Olsen, et al. 2015.
“Equality Bias Impairs Collective Decision-Making Across Cultures.” Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.
Masuda, and Redner. 2011. “Can Partisan Voting Lead to Truth?” Journal of Statistical Mechanics: Theory and Experiment.
Mercier, and Claidière. 2021.
“Does Discussion Make Crowds Any Wiser?” Cognition.
Niemeyer, Veri, Dryzek, et al. 2023.
“How Deliberation Happens: Enabling Deliberative Reason.” American Political Science Review.
Olfati-Saber, Fax, and Murray. 2007.
“Consensus and Cooperation in Networked Multi-Agent Systems.” Proceedings of the IEEE.
Page. 2008. The Difference: How the Power of Diversity Creates Better Groups, Firms, Schools, and Societies: How the Power of Diversity Creates Better Groups, Firms, Schools, and Societies - New Edition.
———. 2011. Diversity and Complexity. Primers in Complex Systems.
Peter Skerry. 2002.
“Beyond Sushiology: Does Diversity Work?” Brookings Institution (blog).
Peters, and Adamou. 2015.
“An Evolutionary Advantage of Cooperation.” arXiv:1506.03414 [Nlin, q-Bio, q-Fin].
Ren, and Beard. 2005. “Consensus Seeking in Multiagent Systems Under Dynamically Changing Interaction Topologies.” Automatic Control, IEEE Transactions on.
Sunstein, and Hastie. 2014. Wiser: Getting Beyond Groupthink to Make Groups Smarter.
Syed. 2020. Rebel Ideas: The Power of Diverse Thinking.
Weisbuch, Deffuant, Amblard, et al. 2002.
“Meet, Discuss, and Segregate!” Complexity.
2 Social structure of knowledge
Vested interests, contrarians, consensus.
Scott Aaronson on “armchair epidemiology” uses the COVID-19 public communication fiasco as a lense on societal collective knowledge and science and the role of contrarians. Connection to red queen signal dynamics should be apparent. The comment threads in that post meander around this topic at length.
This resembles another pyramid of fashionable disagreement that he mentions, the Intellectual Hipsters and Meta-Contrarianism pyramid.
Rex Douglass’s How to be Curious Instead of Contrarian About COVID-19 dive into the Richard Epstein contrarian piece about COVID-19 response as a case study in how to disagree productively.