The Volokh Conspiracy

Informational Cascades:

A good illustration from today's session of my Criminal Law class, which was the first law school class these students ever had. I passed around a seating chart, and asked students to write their first names, last names, and any pronunciation key for their names. At the end of the class, I got the chart, and nearly every student included a phone number.

Why?, I thought. I didn't think I said anything that could have been misheard as a phone number.

And then I realized what must have happened: The first student included a phone number, for whatever individual reason (perhaps because the student thought it would be helpful, or because this was asked in some classes at the university the student went to before). Then the next student saw this, assumed a phone number was requested (relying on the first student's judgment rather than his own memory of what I asked). And once the first few boxes had phone numbers as well as names, the path was set: Nearly everyone else followed suit.

Had the first student not included the phone number, I'm pretty sure this wouldn't have happened; likewise if this hadn't been the first class the students had. (I wonder, by the way, whether people will do the same in other classes. I expressed some surprise at seeing the phone numbers after class, but not loudly, so only a few students heard it.) But this one person's decision led the rest of the students, quite rationally, to do what they saw others doing.

Jon Roland (mail) (www):
You've just observed a manifestation of herd behavior. You could use it as a teaching experience, and ask the students to relate it to stare decisis. See http://www.constitution.org/col/0610staredrift.htm
8.20.2008 3:36pm
john mcg. (mail):
So on their first day of law school the students learned how precedents are set.
8.20.2008 3:38pm
darelf:
I'm pretty sure I would have loudly complained. Likely I would have asked the prof, "What do you need a phone number for?" ( at that age it would have been in a slightly accusatory tone, with a hint of "how dare you" ) Which I guess would have ruined everything for everyone.....

Maybe this explains why I'm not a lawyer?
8.20.2008 3:42pm
GV:
And didn't they mention something about the fact that Orin owes me a beer?
8.20.2008 3:49pm
Malvolio:
It's called social proof -- it's a natural phenomenon in any social animal. It has a lot of the same upsides and downsides as stare decisis and precedent.
8.20.2008 3:49pm
bornyesterday (mail) (www):
I used to experiment with things like this back in college. If I got to a classroom early, I'd reach inside, turn of the lights and shut the door and then stand around by the door to see how many people would just walk up and stop without checking the door.
8.20.2008 3:50pm
Arvin (mail) (www):
Maybe they just all thought you were really cute . . .
8.20.2008 3:58pm
Mhoram:
Confirmation that people are sheep.
8.20.2008 4:12pm
Bored 3L:
Off topic I know, but it reminds me of how everyone always naturally sets up a permanent seating arrangement, even if the prof doesn't care where you sit. I love to sit in someone else's seat and watch the cascade of confusion as that person takes someone else's seat and so on.
8.20.2008 4:21pm
Dan Hamilton:
With the youth today their phone number is interchangable with their name. It ia all part of their idenity. One just goes with the other. If you don't give yourphone number the next question is always what is your phone number.

So naturally they put both down. Only want the name? How will you talk to them? How will you text them? Just a name has no use you can't communcate with just a name.

Not a herd, a new reality. I am supprized that people didn't also put down their email address.
8.20.2008 4:27pm
steve lubet (mail):
Perhaps the first student misunderstood what you meant when you said that the pronunciation key should be "phone-etic."
8.20.2008 4:31pm
jgshapiro (mail):
Well, if you were the 10th student and couldn't remember the instructions, it would make more sense to include the number. Not because you are following the herd, but because there is no harm in including more info in this case, and including less info might mean that you screwed up and would have to do more work later to fix it (e.g., stop by after class and provide your phone number).

The interesting case is if there was harm in including the info. For example, what if the first student had included his social security number, thus mooting the basis for most anonymous grading? How many people would have been foolish enough to follow suit?
8.20.2008 4:35pm
Soronel Haetir (mail):
You should become one of those idiosyncratic professors who knock points off for not following directions exactly. That'll teach them to pay attention.
8.20.2008 5:13pm
Ted the Guest (mail):
Why is everyone assuming blind herd behavior? I can just as easily assume it's aggressive posturing for alpha favoritism: The first student seeks and advantage of intimacy with the professor by offering personal information unrequested (a well documented tit-for-tat strategy). The other students, not willing to cede the volley to the first student also proffer their phone numbers. It is a competitive cascade deliberately executed, not blind social proof.
8.20.2008 5:13pm
Soronel Haetir (mail):
Also, how silly are all those students going to feel when it turns out that the last student to handle the sheet used their cell phone to snap a pic and thereby glean valuable information about the rest of the competition?
8.20.2008 5:20pm
Malthus:
Yeah, I was the gal who started that. Next time I plan to put down "Gay, not circumcised."
8.20.2008 5:39pm
wolfefan (mail):
And this first student is the person that you'll be trusting to accurately hear and record the notes for the rest of the class, right?
8.20.2008 5:57pm
Dilan Esper (mail) (www):
What I want to know is, did the members of the Federalist Society refuse to put their phone numbers on the ground that it was contrary to Professor Volokh's original intent? And did the liberal students then argue that they must put their phone numbers down anyway because the many students who had done so established an evolving standard that the phone number be included?
8.20.2008 6:31pm
Dan Hamilton:
You want their phone numbers.

You have your laptop call all their numbers during class and throw out any that have their cell phones on.

It's the only way to check if their phone are on and not just they don't have anyone call.
8.20.2008 6:48pm
OrinKerr:
Maybe they heard that you called on them, and they thought it meant you called them. (A joke-- I think.)
8.20.2008 7:11pm
BRM:
Maybe the people in the back of the class (or whoever filled out the seating chart last) surveyed the field of students and jotted down the numbers of people to whom they were attracted.
8.20.2008 8:23pm
KeithK (mail):

With the youth today their phone number is interchangable with their name. It ia all part of their idenity. One just goes with the other. If you don't give yourphone number the next question is always what is your phone number.


Really? Must make it so much easier when hitting on someone...
8.20.2008 8:31pm
Javert:

You have your laptop call all their numbers during class and throw out any that have their cell phones on.
Here's what I do, a revised version of something I stole from Walter Williams: Phone rings in class. Without looking at caller id, they have to answer: "I love you." Plus I get to use their phone for a week to call anywhere in the world.

Once, in a class of about 100, a young female student's phone rang. The class gasped and stared at her. She, redfaced, answered haltingly: "I love you." It was her tennis coach.
8.20.2008 8:41pm
Dan Weber (www):
I'm gonna be first in class and put down a birthday and social security number. My buddy will be last in class and take the sheet out the door.
8.21.2008 12:42pm
JoelP:
If you then asked a student to repeat your instructions, how many would have stated that you'd asked for a phone number?
8.21.2008 7:55pm

Post as: [Register] [Log In]

Account:
Password:
Remember info?

[Important Note to Helpful Readers: If we have confusing typos and especially ugly formatting errors, such as an unclosed underline or bold tag, we'd love to hear from you about them -- but please e-mail the author about this, rather than leaving a comment. We often won't read the comments for a while after the post, and if there's a glaring formatting error, we'd see it quickly when we revisit the post, even without the comment; and in any event the comment likely isn't going to be that helpful to your fellow comment readers. So please e-mail us directly about glitches like this. Thanks!]

Comment Policy: We'd like the posts to be civil, of course (no profanity, personal insults, and the like), but we're also hoping that people try to be as calm, reasoned, and substantive as possible. So please, also avoid rants, invective, substantial and repeated exaggeration, and radical departures from the topic of the thread. Sticking with substance -- and staying on-topic -- will make the comments more helpful to other readers, and more pleasant.

As editors, we reserve the right to delete posts, and even to kick out posters, though we hope that both of these will be exceptional events. (We also reserve the right to be busy with other things, and therefore (1) not remove all the posts that might merit removal, and (2) ignore demands such as "You should remove A's posts, because they're just as bad as B's!")

Here's a tip: Reread your post, and think of what people would think if you said this over dinner. If you think people would view you as a crank, a blowhard, or as someone who vastly overdoes it on the hyperbole, rewrite your post before hitting enter.

And if you think this is the other people's fault -- you're one of the few who sees the world clearly, but fools wrongly view you as a crank, a blowhard, or as someone who overdoes it on the hyperbole -- then you should still rewrite your post before hitting enter. After all, if you're one of the few who sees the world clearly, then surely it's especially important that you frame your arguments in a way that is persuasive and as unalienating as possible, even to fools.

Our goal is to provide an interesting and pleasant environment that can help inform readers. To do that, we'll occasionally have to exercise our editorial discretion. Think of this as an in-person discussion group, where having different voices is critical to a great conversation -- but where sometimes the leader has to deal with cranks who sour the conversation more than they enliven it.

Naturally, there's always a risk that this discretion will be used erroneously, no matter how well-intentioned the editor. But discussion groups (especially on the Internet, but also off it) generally need an editor who'll occasionally make such judgments.

And, remember, it's a big Internet. If you think we were mistaken in removing your post (or, in extreme cases, in removing you) -- or if you prefer a more free-for-all approach -- there are surely plenty of ways you can still get your views out.