On individual neutrality and collective decision making

TL;DR

This paper presents a mathematical theory demonstrating that for two decision-makers to collaborate effectively, at least one must sometimes remain neutral, offering a formal justification for a common counseling principle.

Contribution

It introduces a simple mathematical model explaining the necessity of neutrality in effective joint decision-making.

Findings

Collaboration improves when at least one entity is occasionally neutral.

Neutrality is mathematically justified as beneficial for collective decision quality.

The theory supports traditional counseling advice about neutrality in partnerships.

Abstract

We derive a simple mathematical "theory" to show that two decision-making entities can work better together only if at least one of them is occasionally willing to stay neutral. This provides a mathematical "justification" for an age-old cliche among marriage counselors.