Hostname: page-component-8448b6f56d-dnltx Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-17T21:12:19.336Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Keeping conceptual boundaries distinct between decision making and learning is necessary to understand social influence

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  26 February 2014

Gaël Le Mens
Gaël Le Mens*
Affiliation:
Department of Economics and Business, Universitat Pompeu Fabra, 08005 Barcelona, Spain. gael.le-mens@upf.eduhttp://www.econ.upf.edu/~glemens/
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Bentley et al. make the deliberate choice to blur the distinction between learning and decision making. This obscures the social influence mechanisms that operate in the various empirical settings that their map aims to categorize. Useful policy prescriptions, however, require an accurate understanding of the social influence mechanisms that underlie the dynamics of popularity.

Type
Open Peer Commentary
Information
Behavioral and Brain Sciences , Volume 37 , Issue 1 , February 2014 , pp. 87 - 88
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2014 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Arthur, W. (1989) Competing technologies, increasing returns, and lock-in by historical events. The Economic Journal 99:116–31.Google Scholar
Bikhchandani, S., Hirshleifer, D. & Welch, I. (1992) A theory of fads, fashion, custom, and cultural change as informational cascades. Journal of Political Economy 100(5):992–1026.Google Scholar
Denrell, J. & Le Mens, G. (2007) Interdependent sampling and social influence. Psychological Review 114(2):398–422. doi:10.1037/0033-295X.114.2.398.Google Scholar
Denrell, J. & Le Mens, G. (2013) Information sampling, conformity and collective mistaken beliefs. In: Proceedings of the 35th Annual Conference of the Cognitive Science Society, ed. Knauff, M., Pauen, M., Sebanz, N. & Wachsmuth, I., pp. 2177–82. Cognitive Science Society.Google Scholar
Salganik, M. J., Dodds, P. S. & Watts, D. J. (2006) Experimental study of inequality and unpredictability in an artificial cultural market. Science 311(5762):854–56. doi:10.1126/science.1121066.CrossRefGoogle Scholar