Random Deviations Improve Micro–Macro Predictions

An Empirical Test

Journal Article (2020)
Author(s)

Michael Mäs (Rijksuniversiteit Groningen)

Dirk Helbing (TU Delft - Values Technology and Innovation, ETH Zürich)

Department
Values Technology and Innovation
Copyright
© 2020 Michael Mäs, D. Helbing
DOI related publication
https://doi.org/10.1177/0049124117729708
More Info
expand_more
Publication Year
2020
Language
English
Copyright
© 2020 Michael Mäs, D. Helbing
Department
Values Technology and Innovation
Issue number
2
Volume number
49
Pages (from-to)
387-417
Reuse Rights

Other than for strictly personal use, it is not permitted to download, forward or distribute the text or part of it, without the consent of the author(s) and/or copyright holder(s), unless the work is under an open content license such as Creative Commons.

Abstract

Many sociological theories make critically different macropredictions when their microassumptions are implemented stochastically rather than deterministically. Deviations from individuals’ behavioral patterns described by microtheories can spark cascades that change macrooutcomes, even when deviations are rare and random. With two experiments, we empirically tested whether macrophenomena can be critically shaped by random deviations. Ninety-six percent of participants’ decisions were in line with a deterministic theory of bounded rationality. Despite this impressive microlevel accuracy, the deterministic model failed to predict the observed macrooutcomes. However, a stochastic version of the same microtheory largely improved macropredictions. The stochastic model also correctly predicted the conditions under which deviations mattered. Results also supported the hypothesis that nonrandom deviations can result in fundamentally different macrooutcomes than random deviations. In conclusion, we echo the warning that deterministic microtheories can be misleading. Our findings show that taking into account deviations in sociological theories can improve explanations and predictions.