 When conditions (a)–(c) do not hold, results are more ambiguous or even negative. When experts are not reliable, i.e., the individual probability of getting the judgment right is \(&lt;.5\), the larger the group, the less likely is it to reach a correct group judgment and the optimal group size is a single expert. When the outcome can have more than two values, inconsistent results can obtain. This can easily be demonstrated with an example in which there are three possible outcomes and three experts. Suppose, for instance, that a panel has to decide which of three treatments A, B and C is the most effective in treating some disease. The individual panel members have the following individual rankings: