The Effects of Averaging Subjective Probability Estimates Between and Within Judges

@article{citeulike:2714435, abstract = {The average probability estimate of J > 1 judges is generally better than its components. Two studies test 3 predictions regarding averaging that follow from theorems based on a cognitive model of the judges and idealizations of the judgment situation. Prediction 1 is that the average of conditionally pairwise independent estimates will be highly diagnostic, and Prediction 2 is that the average of dependent estimates (differing only by independent error terms) may be well calibrated. Prediction 3 contrasts between- and within-subject averaging. Results demonstrate the predictions' robustness by showing the extent to which they hold as the information conditions depart from the ideal and as J increases. Practical consequences are that (a) substantial improvement can be obtained with as few as 2–6 judges and (b) the decision maker can estimate the nature of the expected improvement by considering the information conditions.}, author = {Ariely, Dan and Au, Wing T. and Bender, Randall H. and Budescu, David V. and Dietz, Christiane B. and Gu, Hongbin and Wallsten, Thomas S. and Zauberman, Gal }, citeulike-article-id = {2714435}, doi = {10.1037/1076-898X.6.2.130}, journal = {Journal of Experimental Psychology: Applied}, keywords = {confidence-judgment, group, subjective-probability}, month = {June}, number = {2}, pages = {130--147}, posted-at = {2008-04-24 22:41:52}, priority = {2}, title = {The Effects of Averaging Subjective Probability Estimates Between and Within Judges}, url = {http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/1076-898X.6.2.130}, volume = {6}, year = {2000} }

TY - JOUR ID - citeulike:2714435 L3 - citeulike-article-id:2714435 TI - The Effects of Averaging Subjective Probability Estimates Between and Within Judges JF - Journal of Experimental Psychology: Applied VL - 6 IS - 2 SP - 130 EP - 147 N2 - The average probability estimate of J > 1 judges is generally better than its components. Two studies test 3 predictions regarding averaging that follow from theorems based on a cognitive model of the judges and idealizations of the judgment situation. Prediction 1 is that the average of conditionally pairwise independent estimates will be highly diagnostic, and Prediction 2 is that the average of dependent estimates (differing only by independent error terms) may be well calibrated. Prediction 3 contrasts between- and within-subject averaging. Results demonstrate the predictions' robustness by showing the extent to which they hold as the information conditions depart from the ideal and as J increases. Practical consequences are that (a) substantial improvement can be obtained with as few as 2–6 judges and (b) the decision maker can estimate the nature of the expected improvement by considering the information conditions. KW - confidence-judgment KW - group KW - subjective-probability AU - Ariely, Dan AU - Au, Wing AU - Bender, Randall AU - Budescu, David AU - Dietz, Christiane AU - Gu, Hongbin AU - Wallsten, Thomas AU - Zauberman, Gal PY - 2000/06/01/ UR - http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/1076-898X.6.2.130 ER -