Wisdom of Crowds, Wisdom of the Few: Expertise versus Diversity across Epistemic Landscapes

In a series of formal studies and less formal applications, Hong and Page offer a ‘diversity trumps ability’ result on the basis of a computational experiment accompanied by a mathematical theorem as explanatory background (Hong & Page 2004, 2009; Page 2007, 2011). “[W]e find that a random collection of agents drawn from a large set of limited-ability agents typically outperforms a collection of the very best agents from that same set” (2004, p. 16386). The result has been extremely influential as an epistemic justification for diversity policy initiatives. Here we show that the ‘diversity trumps ability’ result is tied to the particular random landscape used in Hong and Page’s simulation. We argue against interpreting results on that random landscape in terms of ‘ability’ or ‘expertise.’ These concepts are better modeled on smother and more realistic landscapes, but keeping other parameters the same those are landscapes on which it is groups of the best performing that do better. Smoother landscapes seem to vindicate both the concept and the value of expertise. Change in other parameters, however, also vindicates diversity. With an increase in the pool of available heuristics, diverse groups again do better. Group dynamics makes a difference as well; simultaneous ‘tournament’ deliberation in a group in place of the ‘relay’ deliberation in Hong and Page’s original model further emphasizes an advantage for diversity. ‘Tournament’ 2 dynamics particularly shows the advantage of mixed groups that include both experts and non-experts. As a whole, our modeling results suggest that relative to problem characteristics and conceptual resources, the wisdom of crowds and the wisdom of the few each have a place. We regard ours as a step toward attempting to calibrate their relative virtues in different modelled contexts of intellectual exploration

Amyloid-β42 Interacts Mainly with Insoluble Prion Protein in the Alzheimer Brain*

The prion protein (PrP) is best known for its association with prion diseases. However, a controversial new role for PrP in Alzheimer disease (AD) has recently emerged. In vitro studies and mouse models of AD suggest that PrP may be involved in AD pathogenesis through a highly specific interaction with amyloid-β (Aβ42) oligomers. Immobilized recombinant human PrP (huPrP) also exhibited high affinity and specificity for Aβ42 oligomers. Here we report the novel finding that aggregated forms of huPrP and Aβ42 are co-purified from AD brain extracts. Moreover, an anti-PrP antibody and an agent that specifically binds to insoluble PrP (iPrP) co-precipitate insoluble Aβ from human AD brain. Finally, using peptide membrane arrays of 99 13-mer peptides that span the entire sequence of mature huPrP, two distinct types of Aβ binding sites on huPrP are identified in vitro. One specifically binds to Aβ42 and the other binds to both Aβ42 and Aβ40. Notably, Aβ42-specific binding sites are localized predominantly in the octapeptide repeat region, whereas sites that bind both Aβ40 and Aβ42 are mainly in the extreme N-terminal or C-terminal domains of PrP. Our study suggests that iPrP is the major PrP species that interacts with insoluble Aβ42 in vivo. Although this work indicated the interaction of Aβ42 with huPrP in the AD brain, the pathophysiological relevance of the iPrP/Aβ42 interaction remains to be established