Cover Image

Dyadic judgments based on conflicting samples: the failure to ignore invalid input

The present research demonstrates a so far unrecognized impediment of group performance, metacognitive myopia (Fiedler, 2012). Judges and decision-makers follow the given samples of information uncritically and neglect the metacognitive assessment of the samples' validity. Applying this notion...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Fiedler, Klaus (Author) , Krüger, Tobias (Author) , Koch, Alex (Author) , Kutzner, Florian (Author)
Format: Article (Journal)
Language:English
Published: 15 January 2020
In: Journal of behavioral decision making
Year: 2020, Volume: 33, Issue: 4, Pages: 492-504
ISSN:1099-0771
DOI:10.1002/bdm.2173
Online Access:Verlag, lizenzpflichtig, Volltext: https://doi.org/10.1002/bdm.2173
Verlag, lizenzpflichtig, Volltext: https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1002/bdm.2173
Get full text
Author Notes:Klaus Fiedler, Tobias Krüger, Alex Koch, Florian Kutzner
Description
Summary:The present research demonstrates a so far unrecognized impediment of group performance, metacognitive myopia (Fiedler, 2012). Judges and decision-makers follow the given samples of information uncritically and neglect the metacognitive assessment of the samples' validity. Applying this notion to dyadic judgments, we instructed dyads to jointly estimate conditional probabilities p (Win|A) and p (Win|B) of Lotteries A and B. One person per dyad experienced a valid sample (winning rates conditional on lotteries). The other person experienced an invalid, reverse sample (lotteries conditional on winning). Whereas valid samples provide unbiased estimates of lotteries' winning probabilities, invalid samples can greatly misrepresent the association of winning and lotteries (depending on lottery base rates). Across three experiments, metacognitive myopia—both at the individual and at the dyadic group level—prevented participants from discriminating valid and invalid samples. Group judgments were biased toward erroneous implications of invalid samples, reflecting an equality bias among unequal group members.
Item Description:Gesehen am 12.10.2020
Physical Description:Online Resource
ISSN:1099-0771
DOI:10.1002/bdm.2173

Similar Items