Researchers have identified spontaneous, synchronized oscillations in the movement of dense human crowds, similar to those observed in flocks of birds or schools of fish. By analyzing high-resolution trajectory data from high-density crowd events, they discovered distinct collective oscillatory modes where individuals unconsciously coordinate their movements, swaying side-to-side or back-and-forth. These oscillations emerge at certain critical densities and appear to be driven by local interactions between individuals, enhancing crowd fluidity and facilitating navigation. This discovery sheds light on the fundamental principles governing human collective behavior and could contribute to safer and more efficient crowd management strategies.
The original poster wonders if people can be categorized as primarily "story-based" or "fact-based" thinkers. They observe that some individuals seem to prioritize narratives and emotional resonance, readily accepting information that fits a compelling story, even if evidence is lacking. Conversely, others appear to prioritize factual accuracy and logical consistency, potentially dismissing emotionally resonant stories if they lack evidential support. The author questions whether this distinction is valid, if people fall on a spectrum, or if other factors are at play, and asks if this dichotomy influences communication styles and understanding.
The Hacker News comments discuss the idea of "story-based" vs. "fact-based" people, with many expressing skepticism about such a rigid dichotomy. Several commenters suggest the distinction isn't about accepting facts, but rather how people prioritize and interpret them. Some argue everyone uses narratives to understand the world, with the key difference being the quality of evidence people demand to support their narratives. Others point out the influence of cognitive biases, motivated reasoning, and the difficulty of separating facts from interpretation. The role of emotion and empathy in decision-making is also highlighted, with some arguing "story-based" thinking might simply reflect a greater emphasis on emotional connection. A few commenters mention Myers-Briggs personality types as a potential framework for understanding these differences, though this is met with some skepticism. Overall, the consensus seems to be that the proposed dichotomy is overly simplistic and potentially misleading.
Summary of Comments ( 17 )
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=42987646
Hacker News users discussed the study on crowd oscillations with a mix of skepticism and interest. Some questioned the novelty of the findings, pointing out that synchronized swaying in crowds is a well-known phenomenon, especially at concerts. Others expressed concern about the methodology, particularly the reliance on overhead video and potential inaccuracies in tracking individual movements. Several commenters suggested alternative explanations for the observed oscillations, such as subconscious mimicking of neighbors or reactions to external stimuli like music or announcements. There was also a thread discussing the potential applications of the research, including crowd management and understanding collective behavior in other contexts. A few users appreciated the visualization and analysis of the phenomenon, even if they weren't surprised by the underlying behavior.
The Hacker News post titled "Emergence of collective oscillations in human crowds," linking to a Nature article, has a modest number of comments, focusing primarily on the methodology and implications of the research. No one explicitly disputes the findings, but several commenters express caution about the interpretation and generalizability of the results.
One commenter highlights the controlled nature of the experiment, pointing out that participants were explicitly instructed to clap or cheer, questioning how this translates to spontaneous crowd behavior in real-world scenarios. They suggest that further research in less controlled environments is necessary to understand true emergent behavior.
Another commenter focuses on the limited scope of the study's "oscillations," noting they are primarily rhythmic clapping and cheering, rather than more complex movements or behaviors. They wonder how the dynamics might change with different kinds of crowds or in situations involving movement, like mosh pits or protest marches.
Several commenters delve into the mathematical modeling used in the study. One appreciates the use of Kuramoto oscillators, a common tool for studying synchronization phenomena, but questions the specific parameter choices and how well they reflect real human interaction. Another points out the inherent limitations of modeling complex social systems, emphasizing that even sophisticated models are simplifications and may not capture all the relevant factors.
A recurring theme is the potential application of this research to crowd management and safety. One commenter speculates on how understanding these oscillations could help prevent dangerous crowd crushes or improve evacuation procedures. However, others express skepticism, noting the difficulty of predicting and controlling crowd behavior in real-world emergencies, even with improved models.
Finally, a few comments touch upon the broader implications for understanding collective human behavior. One commenter draws a parallel to other synchronized phenomena in nature, like firefly flashing or bird flocking, suggesting a deeper underlying principle at play. Another ponders the role of social influence and conformity in driving these oscillations, and how these dynamics might play out in other social contexts.
In summary, the comments on the Hacker News post demonstrate a generally receptive but cautious attitude towards the research. While acknowledging the interesting findings, many commenters emphasize the need for further research to validate and generalize the results, particularly in less controlled and more complex real-world scenarios. The discussion touches upon methodological concerns, potential applications, and broader philosophical implications of studying collective human behavior.