Take me to your leader: The vexing problem of cascades

"So, Glen, what do you think about ****'s idea?"

I know how the story goes at this point. It's a horrible idea. Anyone with half a brain will agree. It won't work...it overlooks critical information...it's just bad.

Then again, two people have said they like it. And the boss suggested it.

"Great idea, sir/ma'am. I think this will help solve a lot of problems." I manage a smile. My boss nods his/her approval.

And like that, I've participated in a cascade.

It's human nature to be agreeable. We want to be liked. And we tend to fold like an Iraqi tent to fit in. It doesn't take very much for us to outsource our opinion.

I remember from my studies of Psychology reading the landmark conformity studies. Milgram, for instance, in which participants will inflict (to their knowledge) physical damage on other people for no real reason. Or, in a study whose name I can't recall, the participant will knowingly give the wrong answer to agree with the crowd.

Likewise, the next time you happen to stop by a Craps table (Vegas or elsewhere)...watch how people are betting. What you'll find, I suspect, are a lot more "right way" than "wrong way" betters. In Craps, a player can bet for or against the player. It's usually more popular to bet against the house...you get to cheer when the house loses. The wrong way better collects as the players lose...and it's generally a lonely road.
Statistically they're the same bet. Yet the popularity, the camaraderie, and the "fitting in" are powerful siren songs.

I tend to be a contrarian. To my detriment at times, I share what I think whether it's agreeable or not. This nasty habit has gotten me in trouble. But it's also something I don't always stick to!

Cascades are essentially when information is sequentially shared, and those later down the line are less likely to risk alienating the crowd or the information already supported by several people. There's a pressure to conform.

Digital publishing, however, remediates "time" and "authority." Plus, it's a space conducive to keeping anonymous. Blogs...wikis...twitter...permit people with limited technological skill to share their ideas. It results in decreased pressure to "fit in." Theoretically, at least, it's more "aggregating" and less "deliberating."