A precursor to the concept of collective intelligence is entomologist William Morton Wheeler, who notes that apparently independent individuals can cooperate so closely as to become indistinguishable from a single organism. In 1911, he observed this collaborative process in his work with ants that acted like the cells of a single animal with a collective mind. He called this large creature that seemed to form the colony a superorganism.

In 1912, Émile Durkheim identified society as the unique resource of human logical thought, arguing that society constitutes a greater intelligence because it transcends the individual in space and time.[3]​.

According to George Pór (1999) the way in which an organization can develop collective intelligence is similar to that of a biological organism: by developing and using a nervous system, which must:

Understanding that all thoughts can be considered as a collective construction of a group of people, since thoughts do not belong to a particular individual. We agree to affirm that the definitions of intelligence have biological connotations, because it is human beings who, through interactions, shape the reality of the network that produces them and the scenario in which they live.

The concept of collective intelligence is boosted by information and communication technologies, especially with the arrival of the Internet into our lives and how it has modified the way we think and do. With Web 2.0, new ways of relating appear, in which consumers also become creators, coining the term "prosumers"), as a result of the great ease in freely providing information. This new opportunity that Web 2.0 has provided has led to the creation of spaces dedicated exclusively to the creation of content through collective intelligence, citing as an example the creation of collaborative software on the Arduino platform.

It should be noted that there are also controversies in this field. Hugo Pardo Kuklinski") exposes the danger of the appearance of "intellectual inaccuracies", as a consequence of due freedom to contribute new content or modify it. Under this concept, amateur and professional* writers are placed on the same level."[4]​* Pierre Lévy suggests that the average opinion loses rationality, because it is based on trends, which causes objectivity to blur. Intelligence and social knowledge constitute central roles in everyday life, while information that has a bias is because it is linked to various opinions and not to one in particular. Taking into account that this situation depends on the context in which it occurs, although it is general in nature, it should not always be correct.[5]​

In contrast to this argument, other authors highlight the importance of expanding knowledge, where everyone can contribute something that makes collective intelligence grow. Accepting new points of view from different fields of knowledge allows collective intelligence to be reviewed by the consumers themselves, who update the information, expand it and correct it.

Thanks to collective intelligence, studies can be carried out that collect data provided by web users, redefining knowledge as a constantly updated asset. By analyzing social networks, users' consumption preferences can be studied to make various suggestions. However, this data may not be reliable because the accounts are private and do not provide the required information. Finally, it is important to keep in mind that not all data research companies have access to this data due to the privacy policies of each page.

The benefit of collective intelligence on the web lies in the fact that a diversity of opinions is obtained from different people, belonging to different cultures, residing in other parts of the world. It is then that the diversity of contributions allows us to obtain an idea or data that is closer to reality, opening a space for different issues in a global way.

Another example of collective knowledge is that which is formed with user data, through our cell phones. Companies offer applications for free to identify, classify and store data in milliseconds. However, not all intelligences that are produced collectively serve the interests of the collective that generates them. There are particular interests in having control of this data. Both the questions and the answers to countless questions can be obtained through the application of various algorithms, built by specialists in the subject.

With the arrival of Web 2.0, all users have greater possibilities of being in contact with other people to share, disseminate and create information. These actions have caused the concept of collective intelligence to be associated with the term "Crowdsourcing". Its acronym comes from the union of the word '"Crowd*", referring to a group of people, and "Outsourcing"*, which means outsourcing, referring to the performance of work through an open call on the network, to participate. The term was coined by Wired magazine editor Jeff Howe who described it as a new Internet-based business model which takes advantage of the creative solution of a network of geographically distributed individuals to solve diverse requests. As a result, better solutions are achieved in less time and effort. Although both terms sound similar, they are not the same. Crowdsourcing is a movement that uses Internet networks to support collective intelligence through a group of diverse, qualified and open people.

According to Larry Huston, former vice president of the company Protect and Gamble, "Unlike the outsourcing process, where a company hires someone to carry out a specific job and when this is completed, the relationship ends. Crowdsourcing consists of attracting several volunteers to the organization to involve them in a creative and collaborative process."[6]​.

A precursor to the concept of collective intelligence is entomologist William Morton Wheeler, who notes that apparently independent individuals can cooperate so closely as to become indistinguishable from a single organism. In 1911, he observed this collaborative process in his work with ants that acted like the cells of a single animal with a collective mind. He called this large creature that seemed to form the colony a superorganism.

In 1912, Émile Durkheim identified society as the unique resource of human logical thought, arguing that society constitutes a greater intelligence because it transcends the individual in space and time.[3]​.

According to George Pór (1999) the way in which an organization can develop collective intelligence is similar to that of a biological organism: by developing and using a nervous system, which must:

Understanding that all thoughts can be considered as a collective construction of a group of people, since thoughts do not belong to a particular individual. We agree to affirm that the definitions of intelligence have biological connotations, because it is human beings who, through interactions, shape the reality of the network that produces them and the scenario in which they live.

The concept of collective intelligence is boosted by information and communication technologies, especially with the arrival of the Internet into our lives and how it has modified the way we think and do. With Web 2.0, new ways of relating appear, in which consumers also become creators, coining the term "prosumers"), as a result of the great ease in freely providing information. This new opportunity that Web 2.0 has provided has led to the creation of spaces dedicated exclusively to the creation of content through collective intelligence, citing as an example the creation of collaborative software on the Arduino platform.

It should be noted that there are also controversies in this field. Hugo Pardo Kuklinski") exposes the danger of the appearance of "intellectual inaccuracies", as a consequence of due freedom to contribute new content or modify it. Under this concept, amateur and professional* writers are placed on the same level."[4]​* Pierre Lévy suggests that the average opinion loses rationality, because it is based on trends, which causes objectivity to blur. Intelligence and social knowledge constitute central roles in everyday life, while information that has a bias is because it is linked to various opinions and not to one in particular. Taking into account that this situation depends on the context in which it occurs, although it is general in nature, it should not always be correct.[5]​

In contrast to this argument, other authors highlight the importance of expanding knowledge, where everyone can contribute something that makes collective intelligence grow. Accepting new points of view from different fields of knowledge allows collective intelligence to be reviewed by the consumers themselves, who update the information, expand it and correct it.

Thanks to collective intelligence, studies can be carried out that collect data provided by web users, redefining knowledge as a constantly updated asset. By analyzing social networks, users' consumption preferences can be studied to make various suggestions. However, this data may not be reliable because the accounts are private and do not provide the required information. Finally, it is important to keep in mind that not all data research companies have access to this data due to the privacy policies of each page.

The benefit of collective intelligence on the web lies in the fact that a diversity of opinions is obtained from different people, belonging to different cultures, residing in other parts of the world. It is then that the diversity of contributions allows us to obtain an idea or data that is closer to reality, opening a space for different issues in a global way.

Another example of collective knowledge is that which is formed with user data, through our cell phones. Companies offer applications for free to identify, classify and store data in milliseconds. However, not all intelligences that are produced collectively serve the interests of the collective that generates them. There are particular interests in having control of this data. Both the questions and the answers to countless questions can be obtained through the application of various algorithms, built by specialists in the subject.

With the arrival of Web 2.0, all users have greater possibilities of being in contact with other people to share, disseminate and create information. These actions have caused the concept of collective intelligence to be associated with the term "Crowdsourcing". Its acronym comes from the union of the word '"Crowd*", referring to a group of people, and "Outsourcing"*, which means outsourcing, referring to the performance of work through an open call on the network, to participate. The term was coined by Wired magazine editor Jeff Howe who described it as a new Internet-based business model which takes advantage of the creative solution of a network of geographically distributed individuals to solve diverse requests. As a result, better solutions are achieved in less time and effort. Although both terms sound similar, they are not the same. Crowdsourcing is a movement that uses Internet networks to support collective intelligence through a group of diverse, qualified and open people.

According to Larry Huston, former vice president of the company Protect and Gamble, "Unlike the outsourcing process, where a company hires someone to carry out a specific job and when this is completed, the relationship ends. Crowdsourcing consists of attracting several volunteers to the organization to involve them in a creative and collaborative process."[6]​.