The Emergence of Specialized Roles Within Groups

Abstract

Humans routinely form groups to achieve goals that no individual can accomplish alone. Group coordination often brings to mind synchrony and alignment, where all individuals do the same thing (e.g., driving on the right side of the road, marching in lockstep, or playing musical instruments on a regular beat). Yet, effective coordination also typically involves differentiation, where specialized roles emerge for different members (e.g., prep stations in a kitchen or positions on an athletic team). Role specialization poses a challenge for computational models of group coordination, which have largely focused on achieving synchrony. Here, we present the CARMI framework, which characterizes role specialization processes in terms of five core features that we hope will help guide future model development: Communication, Adaptation to feedback, Repulsion, Multi‐level planning, and Intention modeling. Although there are many paths to role formation, we suggest that roles emerge when each agent in a group dynamically allocates their behavior toward a shared goal to complement what they expect others to do. In other words, coordination concerns beliefs (who will do what) rather than simple actions. We describe three related experimental paradigms—“Group Binary Search,” “Battles of the Exes,” and “Find the Unicorn”—that we have used to study differentiation processes in the lab, each emphasizing different aspects of the CARMI framework.

Radical Collective Intelligence and the Reimagining of Cognitive Science

“…But the growing ease of doing such studies through web recruitment and carefully programmed online designs brings considerable promise for the field. Goldstone, Andrade-Lotero, Hawkins, & Roberts (2024) discuss experiments that reveal straightforward examples of nondirected alignment; participants were prevented from communicating. In the absence of explicit coordination, participants nonetheless adopted specialized roles to distribute the labor, for instance, by one member of a pair resampling the same locations over multiple rounds of a repeating hidden object task, while the other member samples different locations each round.…”

Group coordination catalyzes individual and cultural intelligence

“…ToMdespite typically being associated with the kind of strategic one-shot reasoning studied in game theory (Meijering, van Rijn, Taatgen, & Verbrugge, 2012;Yoshida, Dolan, & Friston, 2008) -also provides a critical foundation for more sophisticated longitudinal cooperation via joint reasoning about roles. Even simple imitation-based models can display specialization to some degree (C. M. Wu et al, 2023;Dale, Fusaroli, Duran, & Richardson, 2013), with the push and pull of synchrony (Frey & Goldstone, 2018;Goldstone & Ashpole, 2004) and repulsion (Setzler & Goldstone, 2020) providing low-level self-organizing mechanisms for specialization (Goldstone, Andrade-Lotero, Hawkins, & Roberts, 2023). Yet a key feature of successful joint-action coordination is to be able to anticipate the actions or intentions of others on the fly (Sebanz et al, 2006;McEllin, Sebanz, & Knoblich, 2018;Richardson, Marsh, Isenhower, Goodman, & Schmidt, 2007).…”

(Mis)align: a simple dynamic framework for modeling interpersonal coordination

“…Unpacking this multiscale nature of communication requires computational models that are highly flexible, extendable, and interpretable. Devising such a model for dyadic interactions can potentially further inspire the development of computational models for teams and role emergence in groups 73,74 . In conjunction with computational modeling, bridging to the efforts of other methodologies and disciplines that investigate social interactions-including conversation analysis, experimental social psychology, and social neuroscience-could help to address open queries about the multiscale nature of human communication.…”