Predictions pose unique problems. Experts regularly get them wrong, and collective solutions (such as prediction markets and super-forecaster schemes) do better but remain selective and costly. Contrary to the idea that face-to-face discussion hinders collective intelligence, social deliberation improves the resolution of general knowledge problems, with four consensually agreed answers outperforming the aggregate knowledge of 5,000 nondeliberating individuals. Could discussion help predict the future in an efficient, cheap, and inclusive way? We show that smaller groups of lay individuals, when organized, come up with better predictions than those they provide alone. Deliberation and consensus made individual predictions significantly more accurate. Aggregating as few as two consensual predictions did better than classical "wisdom of crowds" aggregation of 100 individual ones. Against the view that discussion can impair decision-making, our results demonstrate that collective intelligence of small groups and consensus-seeking improves accuracy about yet unknown facts, opening the avenue for efficient, inclusive, and inexpensive group forecasting solutions. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2022 APA, all rights reserved).

中文翻译：

---

民主预测：小团体比个人和人群更能预测未来。

预测带来了独特的问题。专家经常弄错它们，而集体解决方案（例如预测市场和超级预测者计划）做得更好，但仍然具有选择性且成本高昂。与面对面讨论会阻碍集体智慧的观点相反，社会协商改善了一般知识问题的解决，四个共识的答案超过了 5000 名非深思熟虑的个人的总知识。讨论能否以一种高效、廉价和包容的方式帮助预测未来？我们表明，在组织起来时，较小的非专业人士群体比他们单独提供的预测结果更好。深思熟虑和共识使个人预测更加准确。聚合少至两个一致的预测比经典的预测要好”