Distortion of Pattern Signals of Human Behavior

Have you ever asked yourself why birds fly in huge numbers in flocks and why each bird keeps the simple rules of flying? More relevant to this post is how they keep communication and trust to keep the flock of birds safe and in harmony while lying?

Have you ever asked yourself how huge numbers of ants communicate to synchronize their movement to form a raft so as not to sink? Watch this short, but amazing video to wonder how ants do this.

Have you ever noticed how trees in a forest alert each other to an incoming predator insect?

Dolphins produce various noises such as whistles, chirps, and clicks in complex patterns with each signal carrying a message.

Animals and trees use signal patterns whether visual, auditory, electrical pulses, touching, and chemical signals to communicate a certain message such as warning signals, finding a food resource, or whatever.

The above examples and more show that it is possible to work synchronize a huge number of agents for the interest of every agent.

The ants form a raft so as not to sink. Survival is the common goal of each ant. To do so ants rely on characteristic signal patterns that all ants abide by. They communicate through these signal patterns with trust and a timely fashion. Imagine the resulting chaos if the ants did not trust the signals they receive. Trust is the glue that keeps them responding to the signals they receive and behave accordingly.

That is to say, behaviors are born out of signals that ripple through with trust and consistency. Each agent is both a receiver and sender of the same signal patterns. Why do humans fail to do the same?  To answer this question let me take a case from human behavior.

Do humans communicate the same signal patterns?

I tested this behavior and came to the same conclusion.

I was lecturing to a group of attendees. I asked the first one sitting nearest to where I was standing to discretely communicate a message to the one next to him and then to the next and so on. The message criticized me (the lecturer) being disqualified to do my job.

At the end of the experiment, I asked the last one to voice out the message he received. It was completely distorted from the message that the group started with.

In such a scenario, we may distort the signal with our biases, beliefs and perceptions. We become doubtful of the credibility of the messages we receive and this distortion of signals ending in people failing to work together.

Humans change their beliefs, habits, and perceptions and these affect their lifestyles and generate new signal patterns accordingly. These signals are the early indicators of future trends.

The big question remains- for humanity to work together every individual should reinforce the same signal before sending it out to the nearby person. When we reach this stage, humanity can work together.

How to detect the new signals generated from human behaviors and keep the same signal without distortion are the big questions.

How can we achieve this? Please share your thoughts.


Ali Anani
Ali Anani
My name is Ali Anani. I hold a Ph.D. from the University of East Anglia (UK, 1972) Since the early nineties I switched my interests to publish posts and presentations and e-books on different social media platforms.

DO YOU HAVE THE "WRITE" STUFF? If you’re ready to share your wisdom of experience, we’re ready to share it with our massive global audience – by giving you the opportunity to become a published Contributor on our award-winning Site with (your own byline). And who knows? – it may be your first step in discovering your “hidden Hemmingway”. LEARN MORE HERE


  1. The thesis presented is stimulating and absolutely acceptable.
    I had read that animals would lack symbols and language, but develop new technologies, food preferences, communication gestures and other skills that young people learn from old people. Their ecological success is primarily due to the high level of cooperation and the sophisticated division of labor they put in place.
    There is, however, a fundamental difference between “them” and “us”. The “eusocial” insects (ants, bees, etc.) respect the rules as they execute them in a repetitive manner: animals apparently devoid of conscience and reason that give life, through a phenomenon of spontaneous organization, to a real civilization. Nothing to do with human beings, capable of implementing advanced forms of cooperation, but equally of competition. A paradox that is the direct result of the evolution of the Homo genre: our minds had to adapt to an environment – the prehistoric one – in which solidarity towards the inside of one’s group was as indispensable as hostility towards the outside. A dualism that we have carried with us to the present day.
    Hatred, prejudice, violence: women and men are capable of fighting and killing each other. Attitudes we share with all animals. But what makes us human – distinguishing us as a unique species in the world – is the exact opposite: the ability to “voluntarily” practice love, trust, generosity. In a word, cooperation.

    • Absolutely correct observation, Aldo and I agree with you entirely.

      “Nothing to do with human beings, capable of implementing advanced forms of cooperation, but equally of competition”. We learn from nature the right things to do and the humans have the choice to learn and advance what we learn or to go in competition with intentions that may make things even worse than we planned for. It is what you described so well “…exact opposite: the ability to “voluntarily” practice love, trust, generosity. In a word, cooperation”.

      WE know that in collaboration we all win, but the greed may take us into another course of actions.
      We know what is right and then we decide if we act wisely or foolishly..