Abstract
The persistent pervasiveness of small studies in empirical fields is regularly deplored in scientific discussions. Taken individually, higher-powered studies are more likely to be truth-conducive. However, are they also beneficial for the wider performance of truth-seeking communities? We study the impact of sample sizes on collective exploration dynamics under ordinary conditions of resource limitation. We find that large collaborative studies, because they decrease diversity, can have detrimental effects in realistic circumstances that we characterize precisely. We show how limited inertia mechanisms may partially solve this pooling dilemma and discuss our findings briefly in terms of editorial policies.
