Thanks for the reaction. I am sure there is an evolutionary explanation (as is the case for so much of our behaviour!). At a deeper level, it is probably connected to general loss and risk aversion: it's safer not to commit or be seen to commit something that might be detrimental unless it has enough support. Our reputation or worse may be at stake. So, much as you say, regardless of the statistics, the tendency is adaptive in that it might forego a potential benefit, but avoids a potential significant disadvantage. And as with many of our biases, overcoming them when giving in to them would be the default requires thoughtful, deliberate consideration, both on the magnitude of the downside (what have I got to lose?) or the actual strength of the wider sentiment (is it really as small as I conjecture)?