Wisdom likes company

Further scientific support for the "Wisdom of Crowds". I was particularly interested in the comments on numbers: two may be company, but three is a crowd in the 'wisdom of crowds' sense.

groups of two performed at the same level as the best of two individuals, suggesting that this group size was too small to introduce the necessary dynamics for optimal problem-solving. However, since groups of three, four, and five were able to achieve the same results, the authors submit that groups of at least three are necessary and sufficient to perform better than the best of an equivalent number of individuals on complex problems that require understanding of verbal, quantitative, or logical conceptual systems.

What is needed to be said beyond this is what the 'Wisdom of Crowds' points out: that this is not automatic; there have to be certain conditions to do with equality, openness and non-hierarchality present.

And I am left musing over the Trinitarian thing in this too...
ScienceDaily: Groups Perform Better Than The Best Individuals At Solving Complex Problems
Filed in: groups, problem-solving, emergence, Powers