Hide vote results until set threshold/date
Jeff Swift
Public
Seen by 81
Research into group dynamics suggests a phenomenon known as "group polarization," which is basically that people are heavily influenced by the first few people who express an opinion in settings like these. There is a host of reasons behind this behavior, but it has a lot to do with saving face and wanting to seem intelligent and thoughtful by agreeing with the majority. This sort of thing happens largely subconsciously, and seems unavoidable.
Because of this, it seems to me that the vote results should be hid from participant view until after that participant has voted, or until a predetermined criterion has been met that officially closes voting. Otherwise the group dynamics might be innocently tainted by polarization.
Alanna Irving Sun 9 Mar 2014 4:52AM
@jeffswift please have a look at this thread where a very similar suggestion is being discussed toward the end.
mix irving Sun 9 Mar 2014 4:58AM
I think a key part of the app is interaction and being able to change. having said that minimising group think as you've suggested ... after some threshold (proportion or time) seems like a good idea
I would definitely be interested in exploring this
Jesse Doud Sun 9 Mar 2014 7:37AM
@steveupstill this reminded me of what you were saying about large group decisions being swayed.
Robert Guthrie Mon 10 Mar 2014 7:16PM
It's a reasonably simple thing to do - and I agree there are times when this would be an important feature. Would be great to keep the aggregate participation info available during the process though.
Fernando Nunes Tue 11 Mar 2014 1:52AM
I agree @jeffswift, but I think the votes could be able to be hidden until the closure, when all votes should be revealed. It's more simple to get than a threshold.
Simon Tegg Wed 19 Mar 2014 2:35AM
I sometimes catch myself holding off before voting. I kid myself that I'm waiting for 'new information', but much of the 'new information' is just social signals from prior voters.
Rewording this idea for less ambiguity
Feature hides the:
* voters identities, and
* aggregated vote categories #of yes, no etc
But Reveals:
* Total votes
Until:
* Proposal closes, or
* Proposal-author defined threshold of votes, or date is reached
Richard D. Bartlett Wed 19 Mar 2014 5:11AM
Just had a conversation today with one of the folks behind Common Change - a platform for collective resource allocation. They introduced anonymous voting and found it led to better decisions, as people felt more comfortable saying 'no' to things.
I'm very keen to try that out on Loomio; encouraging constructive dissent is one of my core motivations for this whole project!
Philippe Ponge Wed 19 Mar 2014 7:51PM
I'm wondering for this proposition for a major problem I think : by internet, or informatique way, if we hide the voters, big cheating beguin to be possible.
If we show the vote and the voter after the end, it could be different and certainely interessant.
My second reason will be that I like to see the explications with the vote, this is good for the discussion.
Maybe it could be an option for every one until the results.
Tim Hartnett Thu 27 Mar 2014 1:01AM
I see two problems to address. One is that early votes may unduly sway support for a proposal. Another is that early proposals sway the course of exploratory discussion. In general, I have found it best to allow considerable open discussion on a topic BEFORE anyone sets forth a proposal, because once people start committing to a proposal their ego and their reputation can become involved and the danger of polarization grows. I believe Loomio could advise people to hold off on proposal making until the discussion has raised all the concerns that a good proposal would need to address. But I think Loomio should continue to allow people to decide for themselves whether to follow this advice.
Alanna Irving · Sun 9 Mar 2014 4:51AM
@mixirving will be interested in this