Information Cascades in Online Event Scheduling
When it comes to finding a time to meet up that fits into the schedules of busy college students, online polling apps, such as LettuceMeet or When2Meet, have become the preferred method of coordination. However, research has shown that this decision making process can be subjected to social influence and information cascades if the polling interface allows users to see each other’s answers. Simultaneously, however, polls that afford this ability to respondents are considered more likely to be successful—as in the users are more likely to find a time that is agreeable for everyone. This is likely due to the effects of information cascade, wherein which later respondents react to and adopt the preferences of earlier respondents.
From my own experience, when it comes to answering these types of scheduling polls, respondents oftentimes do not indicate all times when they are actually available, but merely times that are convenient for them. For example, as college students, some people may be less inclined to indicate that they are available in the early morning, preferring instead to have the event in the late afternoon or evening. If the first few users who respond to the poll indicate that they are not available in the early morning—even if they technically are—it is more likely that other users will follow their lead and also say that they are unavailable at that time. The logic behind this is simple: if one or more users has already indicated that this time will not work for them, then it will not work for the group as a whole, and there is no need for later respondents to say that they are available at that time, regardless of whether or not they actually are.
Information cascading can actually also work in the opposite direction when it comes to event scheduling. Occasionally, if there is a time that works for everybody except one or two individuals, those individuals will report themselves as more available than they actually are, in favor of rearranging their schedule to prioritize the group over themselves. This is especially the case if the individual is a late respondent to the poll. Throughout college, I have often been this person myself. Rather than risk the poll “failing” to find a time that works for everyone, I would rather change my schedule to fit the needs of the group.
These personal experiences are substantiated by the findings of the study below, which claims that “cascading effects take place during event scheduling, and in particular, that early respondents have a larger influence on the outcome of a poll than people who come late.” Online event planning is likely often a subjective process in which individuals change how they report their availability in order to match the perceived availability of others, rather than a strictly objective a straightforward process where everyone reports their true availability. This can have both positive and negative effects, as mentioned above. Furthermore, the study noticed a “funneling” effect, where availability decreases, “with the least available options provided by the last respondent.” This is likely another effect of information cascades, where the information provided to the last respondent is enough to influence their own decision making/ reporting of availability strictly to the times already agreed upon by previous respondents.
Source: