Independent Experts More Effective Than Collective Expertise in Decision-Making Under Uncertainty

© iStock

A collaborative study by Sergey Stepanov, Associate Professor at the HSE Faculty of Economic Sciences and ICEF, and experts from INSEAD Business School and NYU Shanghai, indicates that in making decisions under high uncertainty, where it is unclear which choice is superior, advice from independent experts may be more beneficial than a collective opinion from a group of experts. The study has been published in Games and Economic Behavior.

In real-life situations, decision-makers often face the dilemma of whether to rely on the opinions of multiple independent experts or opt for collective consultation. Independent expert opinions are common in fields such as science and medicine—for instance, when reviewing papers for academic journals, multiple experts independently provide their feedback without knowing the identities of the other reviewers. Examples of collective expertise include meetings of directors, think tanks, commissions, and advisory boards, where solutions are discussed and assessed by experts working together as a team. 

To determine when it may be more effective to rely on independent expert opinions versus a collective assessment, the researchers developed a model featuring several hypothetical experts who have received information about the situation but may interpret it in different ways. Each expert's goal is to convince the decision-maker of their competence by providing the most accurate forecast possible. The model envisioned two scenarios: independent expertise, where the experts were unaware of each other's involvement, and collective expertise, where they could discuss the information before presenting a unified opinion.

In the model, whether the experts express their true opinions is influenced by their reputation concerns. When a particular option is considered the most likely to be the right choice a priori, an independent expert may hesitate to contradict this prior opinion. But when acting as a group, individuals can first share opinions among themselves and thus reinforce their doubts if many experts have those, allowing the group to provide a more accurate response in such situations. Where an individual expert might refrain from speaking out, a group can persuade management to adopt a different perspective if it appears more suitable.

The study's findings indicate that the effectiveness of either approach depends on the level of certainty in the situation. In conditions of certainty, where the likelihood of success for each option is relatively well understood, a collective approach facilitates the gathering of more data and the development of a unified solution. By collaboratively discussing and analysing information, a team of experts can reach more accurate conclusions and reduce disagreements.

However, independent expertise is more effective in challenging and unpredictable situations. When it is unclear what is right a priori, an individual expert is not afraid of expressing their true opinion. This approach also helps prevent the influence of groupthink, where experts feel compelled to conform to the majority opinion. Hence, in contrast to the collective expertise, independent experts will be able to credibly communicate disagreements among them, which is valuable for choosing the optimal decision.

By 'high uncertainty,' the researchers refer to situations where there is no clear or widely accepted understanding of the potential outcome. These may include unconventional economic forecasts, unstable political situations, unfamiliar medical cases, and other scenarios that require flexibility and a non-standard approach to assessment.

Sergey Stepanov

'The study's findings can reshape our understanding of whether collective or independent advice is more effective. For a decision-maker, this choice does not depend on their personal preferences,' according to Sergey Stepanov, Associate Professor at the Faculty of Economic Sciences.

When it is unclear what choice is correct a priori, , independent experts can provide a more objective opinion. This can be observed, for instance, when surveying economists for forecasts on inflation or GDP growth, where the complexity of economic processes makes it impossible to determine a single 'correct' opinion in advance. The mass media, think tanks, and government agencies conduct such surveys among various experts to obtain a comprehensive assessment of the situation. 

'In some cases, we can choose whether to consult an independent expert or seek advice from a group of experts,' Sergey Stepanov believes. 'For example, when making a complex medical diagnosis, one can either consult several medical experts independently or convene a medical case conference. Both of these approaches can be effective.'

Thus, according to the authors, the choice between independent and collective expertise depends on the specific situation, its complexity, and the available data.