Read the original article here.

---

Understanding Information Cascades: A Key Mechanism of Digital Manipulation

In the age of pervasive digital technology and ubiquitous data, understanding how information flows and influences human behavior is crucial. One powerful phenomenon exploited in the digital realm is the Information Cascade. This educational resource explores what information cascades are, how they function, and critically, how they are leveraged in digital manipulation strategies to influence collective decisions and shape opinions.

What is an Information Cascade?

An information cascade describes a situation where individuals make decisions sequentially, heavily influenced by observing the choices made by those who acted before them. Crucially, the weight given to observed public actions can become so strong that it overrides an individual's own private information or judgment, even if that private information is correct.

Information Cascade / Informational Cascade: A phenomenon in behavioral economics and network theory where people make the same decision in a sequence, primarily influenced by observing the decisions of those who acted earlier, often overriding their own private information.

Information cascades are similar to, but distinct from, herd behavior.

Herd Behavior: A phenomenon where individuals in a group act collectively without centralized direction. This can be driven by various factors, including rational decision-making (like information cascades) but also irrational factors like social pressure, fear, or panic, where individuals might disregard their own information and the observed actions of others simply to conform. An information cascade is a rational explanation for a specific type of herding behavior, where people infer information from observed actions.

The distinction is important: while herd behavior can be driven by simple conformism or emotion, an information cascade is based on a form of rational inference, even if that inference leads to an incorrect conclusion due to limited or misleading public information.

The Two-Step Process and Core Components

An information cascade generally unfolds in a two-step process:

1. An individual faces a decision scenario, typically one with limited options (often binary, like adopt/reject, buy/don't buy, believe/don't believe).
2. Outside factors, particularly observing the choices and apparent outcomes of previous individuals, influence this decision.

This process can be broken down into five basic components:

1. A Decision to be Made: There is a choice point. Examples include adopting a new social media platform, buying a specific product online, supporting a political stance, or believing a piece of news.
2. Limited Action Space: The available actions are typically few and clearly observable (e.g., click 'like', share a post, make a purchase, publicly agree or disagree).
3. Sequential Decision Making: People make their decisions one after another. While not strictly linear like a queue in the digital world, decisions happen over time, and later decision-makers can see the accumulated actions of earlier ones (e.g., seeing the number of likes, shares, or positive reviews a post or product has received).
4. Private Information: Each individual possesses some information that helps guide their decision, independent of others' actions. This could be personal experience, prior knowledge, critical thinking, or even a "gut feeling" about the correctness of an idea or action.
5. Inference from Observable Actions: A person cannot directly see the private information or reasoning of others, but they can infer something about that information from the actions those people take. Seeing many people take the same action suggests they might have private information supporting that action.

How It Works: Public Signals Overriding Private Information

The core mechanism of an information cascade is the weighting of public information (the observed actions of others) against private information (one's own signal).

Imagine a simple scenario (like the urn experiment described in the source, but framed more generally):

• There's a correct decision (e.g., Action A is truly better than Action B).
• Individuals get a "private signal" indicating which action is likely correct. These signals are probabilistic – they are more likely to be correct if the corresponding action is correct, but they aren't guaranteed.
• Individuals decide sequentially, announcing their choice publicly.

The first individual relies solely on their private signal. If their signal favors Action A, they choose A.

The second individual sees the first person chose A. They also have their own private signal.

• If their private signal also favors A, they choose A (public and private align).
• If their private signal favors B, they have a conflict. They must weigh the evidence. The first person's choice of A is evidence that A is correct. Is this single piece of public evidence strong enough to override their own private signal for B?

The third individual sees the first two people chose A. They have their own private signal.

• If their private signal favors A, they choose A.
• If their private signal favors B, the conflict is stronger. Now they see two people chose A. This accumulated public evidence (two As) is often enough to outweigh their single private signal for B. Even if their private signal is correct and the first two people chose A based on incorrect signals or by chance, the rational calculation based only on the observable information (two As seen) leads the third person to choose A.

This is where the cascade starts: Once the accumulated public evidence favoring one action becomes sufficiently strong (e.g., two people choosing A, regardless of their signals), subsequent individuals may disregard their own private signal entirely and simply imitate the majority choice. They reason, "It's more likely that my single private signal is wrong than that the combined private signals of all those before me (as inferred from their actions) are wrong."

Private Signal: An individual's own piece of information or judgment about the correct course of action, independent of observing others' choices.

Public Signal: The information conveyed by observing the actions or choices of previous individuals.

Characteristics Relevant to Digital Manipulation

Understanding the inherent characteristics of information cascades reveals why they are powerful tools for manipulation:

1. Cascades Can Be Incorrect: A cascade can form based on early, potentially erroneous private signals. Once established, individuals will join the cascade even if their private information suggests the opposite, leading to widespread adoption of an incorrect belief or action. This is a primary target for manipulation: driving adoption of false narratives, harmful products, or undesirable political outcomes. This is sometimes called a "Reverse Cascade" if the outcome is wrong.
2. Cascades Can Be Based on Little Information: A cascade can begin with a very small number of initial decisions. In the simplified model, sometimes just two early, aligned decisions can be enough to tip the scales and cause all subsequent individuals to follow, regardless of their private information. This means a manipulator doesn't need to convince a large number of people initially; they just need to influence a few early, visible actors or actions.
3. Cascades Are Fragile: Because individuals within a cascade are ignoring their private information in favor of public signals, the cascade isn't deeply rooted in robust individual knowledge. A single piece of strong, credible public information contradicting the cascade can potentially break it, as it forces individuals to re-evaluate the weight of the public vs. private signals. However, digital manipulators often work to suppress such contradictory public information.
4. Cascades Tend to Occur: In many sequential decision-making scenarios where information is incomplete and public actions are visible, the conditions for an information cascade naturally arise.

Digital Platforms: The Perfect Environment for Cascades

Digital platforms and the data they generate provide an ideal environment for information cascades to flourish and be manipulated.

1. Visibility of Actions: Social media likes, shares, retweets, views, comments, product reviews, ratings, purchase counts, trending lists – these are all highly visible public signals of others' actions. Platforms are designed to display these metrics prominently, making it easy for individuals to see what others are doing.
2. Speed and Scale: Information (and observed actions) spreads rapidly and widely online, accelerating the sequential decision process across vast populations. A cascade that might have taken weeks or months offline can develop in hours or days online.
3. Anonymity and Incomplete Knowledge: While you see that someone liked something or shared it, you often don't know why. Was it a genuine belief? Did they even read it? Were they paid? This lack of insight into others' private information makes relying on the observable action (the public signal) even more appealing and makes individuals susceptible to the cascade effect.
4. Sequential Interaction: Even in seemingly non-sequential environments, online interaction often has a sequential element. You see posts in a feed chronologically or based on popularity (which is itself an outcome of previous actions). Your decision to engage comes after seeing the engagement of others.

Information Cascades and Digital Manipulation Strategies

Digital manipulation frequently exploits the mechanics and characteristics of information cascades. Data is collected and used to initiate, amplify, and sustain cascades that serve the manipulator's goals, whether commercial, political, or social.

1. Seeding the Cascade: Manipulators can initiate a cascade by artificially generating early positive signals for a desired action or negative signals for an undesired one.

   • Example: Using bot accounts to like or share a political post thousands of times early on. This makes the post appear popular (strong public signal), encouraging real users who see it trending to engage or believe it, even if their initial private assessment is uncertain or negative.
   • Example: Paying for fake positive reviews for a product on e-commerce sites. Seeing many 5-star reviews creates a strong public signal of quality, influencing potential buyers more than their own doubts or limited information.

2. Amplifying Visibility: Data analysis helps manipulators understand platform algorithms and user behavior to ensure their seeded signals are seen by key individuals early in the sequence. They can target users identified as influential or particularly susceptible to social proof.

   • Example: Promoting content showing a product is trending or "sold out" to create urgency and imply popularity, triggering a buying cascade.

3. Creating Incorrect Cascades: By manipulating the early public signals, manipulators can trigger cascades that lead to widespread adoption of false information or harmful actions (e.g., belief in conspiracy theories, investment in fraudulent schemes, participation in harmful online challenges). The "it's more likely I'm wrong than all these people are" logic leads people into accepting the incorrect cascade outcome.

   • Example: Spreading a false rumor about a politician. If early, visible accounts (bots, paid influencers) share it widely, it creates a public signal of its existence and apparent belief, leading others to assume it might be true and share it further, regardless of its veracity.

4. Using Data to Predict and Target: Data on user behavior, network connections, and susceptibility to social influence allows manipulators to identify who is most likely to be influenced by a cascade and target them with the right content at the right time.

   • Example: Identifying social media users who tend to follow trending topics or are connected to early adopters of a certain view, then specifically serving them content designed to look like it's already part of an emerging cascade.

5. Reinforcing Cascades and Suppressing Counter-Information: Digital manipulators may actively work to sustain a cascade and counteract its natural fragility.

   • Example: Flooding platforms with more seemingly independent positive signals.
   • Example: Attacking or discrediting sources of public information that contradict the desired cascade, making it harder for individuals to re-evaluate their position based on new, discordant evidence.

Examples in the Digital Landscape

• Social Media Trends: A dance, challenge, or meme can go viral. Early adoption by visible users (influencers, celebrities, friends) provides a public signal of coolness or social acceptance. Others, seeing this widespread participation, join in, not necessarily because they love the activity itself, but because the public signal suggests it's something they should do to be part of the trend. This is often amplified by algorithms that prioritize trending content.
• Spread of Misinformation and Fake News: A false story, particularly if emotionally resonant, can be seeded by malicious actors. Early likes, shares, and comments (real or fake) make it appear credible and popular. Individuals seeing this widespread engagement may assume it has been vetted or is widely believed, overriding their own critical judgment or lack of supporting evidence, and share it further, perpetuating the cascade of misinformation.
• Online Shopping & Reviews: Products with many positive reviews or high ratings are more likely to be purchased. This creates a positive cascade where early buyers influence later buyers. Manipulators exploit this with fake reviews, incentivized reviews, or review bombing of competitors.
• Political Movements and Polarization: Online discussions can quickly devolve into cascades of agreement or disagreement within specific groups. Seeing many others in one's social circle or ideological bubble adopt a strong stance or share specific articles provides a powerful public signal that this view is correct or expected. This can lead individuals to outwardly conform or adopt the view themselves, strengthening polarization and making it harder for dissenting private information to surface within the group. As noted in the source, these cascades can even restructure online social networks, making them more "assortative" (people connecting with similar others), reinforcing echo chambers.

Distinguishing from Related Concepts in Practice

While related, it's useful to distinguish cascades from other concepts in the context of digital manipulation:

• Social Proof: This is the general principle that people are influenced by the actions of others. Information cascades are a specific mechanism by which social proof operates – people use observed actions as information to infer the underlying truth or value, leading them to potentially override their own information. Manipulators leverage social proof via information cascades by making actions visible and quantifiable (likes, shares, etc.).
• Information Diffusion: This simply describes how information spreads through a network. A cascade is a pattern of adoption or belief within that diffusion process, specifically characterized by the sequential overriding of private information by public observation. Not all diffusion is a cascade (e.g., simple sharing of a fact without judgment).
• Social Influence: A broader term covering all ways people influence each other. Information cascades are one form of social influence, specifically based on inferring information from observable actions. Other forms might involve direct persuasion, coercion, or appeals based on relationships.

Conclusion: Awareness is Key

Information cascades are a natural human phenomenon rooted in rational attempts to use available information when faced with uncertainty. However, in the digital age, the visibility, speed, and scale of online interactions, combined with the strategic use of data, make information cascades a potent tool for digital manipulation.

By understanding how visible online actions (likes, shares, trends, reviews) can become powerful public signals that override individual judgment, we can become more critical consumers of digital information. Recognizing that popular does not always mean correct, and that easily observable actions may not reflect the full private information or genuine beliefs of those performing them, is a crucial first step in navigating a landscape where data is constantly being used to influence and control collective behavior.

Awareness of the mechanics of information cascades empowers individuals to pause, consider their own private information, and look for deeper context rather than blindly following the digital crowd, thus mitigating the potential for manipulation.