The effects of averaging subjective probability estimates between and within judges.

Published

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

Pubmed Central 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