Swarm Theory & Group Psychology

Swarm Theory & Group Psychology

Scientists are studying and trying to develop an ability to emulate the actions of animal swarms. The birds and the bees can do it; why cannot humans emulate their behavior to our advantage?

The collective behavior of animal swarms displays advantageous collective actions without the guidance of organized leadership. Ants, as individuals, are not clever—as a collective ants, bees, birds, caribou, etc. are amazingly clever—there seems to exist something one might label as swarm intelligence—simple creatures following simple rules equal swarm intelligence.

Computer engineers attempt to emulate swarm intelligence to solve complex human problems.

Compare animal swarm intelligence with group psychology. What is the nature of the ‘group mind’, i.e. the mental changes such individuals undergo as a result of becoming a group?

A bond develops much like cells which constitute a living body—group mind is more of an unconscious than a conscious force—there are motives for action that elude conscious attention—distinctiveness and individuality become group behavior based upon unconscious motives—there develops a sentiment of invincible power, anonymous and irresponsible attitudes–repressions of unconscious forces under normal situations are ignored—conscience which results from social anxiety disappear.

Contagion sets in—hypnotic order becomes prevalent—individuals sacrifice personal interest for the group interest.

Suggestibility, of which contagion is a symptom, leads to the lose of conscious personality—the individual follows suggestions for actions totally contradictory to person conscience—hypnotic like fascination sets in—will and discernment vanishes—direction is taken from the leader in an hypnotic like manner—the conscious personality disappears.

**“Moreover, by the mere fact that he forms part of an organized group, a man descends several rungs in the ladder of civilization.” Isolated, he may be a cultivated individual; in a crowd, he is a barbarian—a creature acting by instinct. “He possesses the spontaneity, the violence, the ferocity, and also the enthusiasm and heroism of primitive beings.”

There is a lowering of intellectual ability “pointing to its similarity with the mental life of primitive people and of children…A group is credulous and easily influenced”—the improbable seldom exists—they think in images—feelings are very simple and exaggerated—the group knows neither doubt nor uncertainty—extremes are prevalent, antipathy becomes hate and suspicion becomes certainty.

Force is king—force is respected and obeyed without question—kindness is weakness—tradition is triumphant—words have a magical power—supernatural powers are easily accepted—groups never thirst for truth, they demand illusions—the unreal receives precedence over the real—the group is an obedient herd—prestige is a source for domination, however it “is also dependent upon success, and is lost in the event of failure”.**

Perhaps human groups cannot develop in a similar manner as does swarm intelligence but the existence of such successful ways of handling complex problems indicates that some critical thinking regarding human group behavior is certainly in order.

Questions for discussion:

Do you think it is possible for humans to significantly improve performance within a group?

Do you think that we can find a way to make group behavior to be smarter?

Sources for ideas and quotes in this OP come from “Swarm Theory”–an article in the July 2007 edition of “National Geographic” and from “Group Psychology and the Analysis of the Ego” by Freud.

I have a couple of questions for you.

Since you’ve posted these questions, do you have ideas on them you’d like to put forward?

Will you be grading this test on a curve?

For a different take on this you might want to read The Wisdom of Crowds

I can think of only one way the humans can better themself. That one way is by self-actualizing self-learning.
I grew up in a small town in Oklahoma at a time when it was not completely unexpected to see horses used to pull wagons and plows. These horses were fitted with a head harness that placed leather shields next to their eyes that prevented the horse from seeing to the side. The horse was blinded to anything but straight ahead, and thus they were not distracted by anything but doing their job; pulling the wagon or plow.

Our educational system is designed to produce graduates who are prepared to do a job. Mental blinders are set in place such that the graduates do not waste time looking to the left or to the right, but look straight ahead at doing their job. This is what industry wants and this is what graduates of schools and colleges are prepared to do. Perhaps this is necessary.

Perhaps, however, we can have our cake and eat it too. If our graduates recognize that they are not prepared, after graduation, to become critical minded independent thinking personalities they can set about immediately upon graduation to preparing them self for that role. After they have gotten their job they can devote a small amount of their time to becoming that critical minded and independent thinking personality.

I suggest that one of the important things that they might usefully do after graduation is fill in that vast area of ignorance left by our vocational institutions of education; they might usefully start reading history and studying Critical Thinking. History will give them a comprehension of how our society arrived at its present position and CT (Critical Thinking) will prepare them for learning how to think and to make good judgments.

I read the Amazon review and that review leads me to believe that the book sited is a result of the work of an individual who is familiar with “Swarm Theory” as written about in the National Geographic article.

Is that an accurate guess of the content of your refrenced book?

We have always had ways to do both which are out of the reach of animals: We can create organizations. Governments, churches, business corporations, military units, civic associations, fan clubs – all are artificial structures tailored to particular ends. Which might put them outside your OP’s parameters, as “swarms” are by definition unorganized, undifferentiated and leaderless.

There’s also the concept of the emerging global brain.

I’m not sure that’s true in all cases - swarms can be emergently self-organising and this self-organisation can also give rise to differentiation and delegation of function/leadership - slime moulds would be a good example of the phenomenon.

coberst has apparently never hung out with a group of English majors :smiley:

Please define what you mean by the following terms for the purposes of discussion:

“think”
“possible”
“significantly”
“improve”
“performance”
“within”
“group”

Please define what you mean by the following terms for the purposes of discussion:

“think”
“we”
“way”
“make”
“group”
“behavior”
“smarter”

Not to sound snarky or anything, but I get the impression that you haven’t studied psych in an academic setting–including things like classes on research methods–and don’t have much of an idea on how to frame questions for research.

I article about Swarm Theory tells us that it is because every creature is following simple instinctual algorithims and that there is no managment and each individual is following this simple program is the reason it works so well.

You got to be joking. Define define.

You are correct. I have learned all that I know about this domain of knowledge on my own. I am not doing research.

Not joking. Your questions are so vague as to be essentially meaningless.

Try doing a search for “operational definition”.

Uh, yes. The United States of America certainly accomplishes things that I as an individual cannot.

Note that the individual ants in an ant colony are not “improved” by their collective behavior. They function the same whether in a group or out.

Almost certainly.

I recommend you read the book Emergence by Steven Johnson.

It would be a plus not to study in academic settings, at least not to take the structures very seriously. It would interfere with real thinking processes, whatever they are. CT

What the vibrating Christ are you talking about?

Hey, I grew up in a small town in Oklahoma, but it is big now – Tulsa. I understand completely what you are saying about current education practices. Your post is good, not sure you will be understood due to the narrowness of education. I agree if you want to know what is going on in the world you just have to learn about it on your own. A lot of people say it with “you have got to think outside the box.” Most people can’t see the box. I can’t say when I first discovered there are not X number of personalities, and Y degrees deviations, and Z planes of thought like everything in the text book states. There is a great deal more to life than can ever be catalogued and filed into “clumps” of knowledge for easy digestion by students. You get almost nothing but outlines in school. Then there are those who do study in great depth, they learn more and more about less and less until they know everything about nothing. Information that may be interesting but not of much help to solve the problems of this world. The biggest being how to get along better so we don’t destroy ourselves. If you want to know you got to read.

First of all, Christ does not vibrate, He radiates, light, love, and compassion.

Now having said that, I am talking about learning, and how this world is not structured. The world is ordered and there are repeating patterns in that order that change constantly. In school they teach you structure, and most come away believing the world is really like that. Logical, critical thinking is also taught in stuctures. On these pages we hear how everything must be proven by the “method” of science. We hear about strawmen, circular thinking, flying pasta monsters, and pink unicorns. Then there are the methods – falsification, repeatability, etc. All this teaching is not what the world is about. You are taught in these methods because it is easier for students to understand structure, they can be memorized and learned by rote. But they do not reflect the reality of the world we live in. Hopefully as you grow older you will read and learn to look beyond your education, and your upbringing, to get a glimpse of the real world.

Apparently he’s talking about the fact that following the scientific method means that you occasionally have to admit that you were mistaken.

Actually, IIRC, the books states that for crowds to produce an accurate answer to a problem, there cannot be interdependence within the group. That is to dscourage “groupthink” from skewing the results. For example, if a dozen people independently guess at the number of jellybeans in a jar, the mean of their answers would be more accurate than if they all worked together to guess where the most vocal or influential members would skew the answer.

Have you tried changing the batteries?