The effects of averaging subjective probability estimates between and within judges.
Journal Article (Journal Article)
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.
Full Text
Duke Authors
Cited Authors
- Ariely, D; Au, WT; Bender, RH; Budescu, DV; Dietz, CB; Gu, H; Wallsten, TS; Zauberman, G
Published Date
- June 2000
Published In
Volume / Issue
- 6 / 2
Start / End Page
- 130 - 147
PubMed ID
- 10937317
Electronic International Standard Serial Number (EISSN)
- 1939-2192
International Standard Serial Number (ISSN)
- 1076-898X
Digital Object Identifier (DOI)
- 10.1037//1076-898x.6.2.130
Language
- eng