群体的近视：书库交易的集体评价研究
The Myopia of Crowds: A Study of Collective Evaluation on Stack Exchange
摘要：
通过利用群体聚集各种信息的能力，群体往往可以做出比个人或专家小组更好的决策。问答网站，如Stack Exchange，依靠“群体智慧”效应来确定用户所提问题的最佳答案。我们分析了Stack Exchange网络上250个社区的数据，以确定影响哪些答案被选为最佳答案的因素。我们的研究结果表明，而不是评估一个问题的所有可用的答案，用户依赖于简单的认知推理来选择一个答案投票或接受。这些认知推理与答案的显著性有关，比如它的排列顺序以及它占据了多少屏幕空间。与投票用户相比，提问者似乎更依赖于启发式推理，当选择一个答案作为最有帮助的答案时，投票者使用接受本身作为启发式推理：他们更有可能在答案被接受后选择答案，而不是在同一个答案被接受之前。随着可用答案数量的增加，这些推理在解释和预测行为方面变得更加重要。我们的研究结果表明，随着答案数量的增加，群体判断可能变得不那么可靠。
英文摘要：
Crowds can often make better decisions than individuals or small groups of experts by leveraging their ability to aggregate diverse information. Question answering sites, such as Stack Exchange, rely on the "wisdom of crowds" effect to identify the best answers to questions asked by users. We analyze data from 250 communities on the Stack Exchange network to pinpoint factors affecting which answers are chosen as the best answers. Our results suggest that, rather than evaluate all available answers to a question, users rely on simple cognitive heuristics to choose an answer to vote for or accept. These cognitive heuristics are linked to an answer's salience, such as the order in which it is listed and how much screen space it occupies. While askers appear to depend more on heuristics, compared to voting users, when choosing an answer to accept as the most helpful one, voters use acceptance itself as a heuristic: they are more likely to choose the answer after it is accepted than before that very same answer was accepted. These heuristics become more important in explaining and predicting behavior as the number of available answers increases. Our findings suggest that crowd judgments may become less reliable as the number of answers grow.
机构、总结、中文摘要均由AI分析而来，可能存在错误，请以论文正文为准。
