Intuitions About Combining Opinions: Misappreciation of the Averaging Principle

References

• Allen V. L., Berkowitz L. Situational factors in conformity. Advances in Experimental Social Psychology (1965) Vol. 2(Academic Press, New York) 133–175Crossref, Google Scholar
• Ariely D., Au W. T., Bender R. H., Budescu D. V., Dietz C., Gu H., Wallsten T. S., Zauberman G. The effects of averaging subjective probability estimates between and within judges. J. Experiment. Psych.: Appl. (2000) 6:130–147Crossref, Google Scholar
• Armstrong J. S., Armstrong J. S. Combining forecasts. Principles of Forecasting: A Handbook for Researchers and Practitioners (2001) (Kluwer, New York) Crossref, Google Scholar
• Brase G. L. Ecological and evolutionary validity: Comments on Johnson-Laird, Legrenzi, Girotto, Legrenzi, & Carverni's (1999) Mental Model Theory of extensional reasoning. Psych. Rev. (2002) 109:722–228Crossref, Google Scholar
• Bruce R. S. Group judgments in the fields of lifted weights and visual discrimination. J. Psych. (1935) 1:117–121Crossref, Google Scholar
• Clemen R. T. Combining forecasts: A review and annotated bibliography. Internat. J. Forecasting (1989) 5:559–609Crossref, Google Scholar
• Clemen R. T., Winkler R. L. Combining economic forecasts. J. Bus. Econom. Statist. (1986) 4:39–46Crossref, Google Scholar
• Curley S. P., Browne G. J. Normative and descriptive analysis of Simpson's Paradox in decision making. Organ. Behavior Human Decision Processes (2001) 84:308–333Crossref, Google Scholar
• Dawes R. M., Corrigan B. Linear models in decision making. Psych. Bull. (1974) 81:95–106Crossref, Google Scholar
• Deutsch M., Gerard H. B. A study of normative and informational social influences upon individual judgment. J. Abnormal Social Psych. (1955) 51:629–636Crossref, Google Scholar
• Einhorn H. J., Hogarth R. M., Klempner E. Quality of group judgment. Psych. Bull. (1977) 84:158–172Crossref, Google Scholar
• Eysenck H. J. The validity of judgments as a function of number of judges. J. Experiment. Psych. (1939) 25:650–654Crossref, Google Scholar
• Fiedler K. Beware of samples! A cognitive-ecological sampling approach to judgment biases. Psych. Rev. (2000) 107:659–676Crossref, Google Scholar
• Fildes R., Makridakis S. The impact of empirical accuracy studies on time series analysis and forecasting. Internat. Statist. Rev. (1995) 63:289–308Crossref, Google Scholar
• Fisher B. A., Ellis D. G.Small Group Decision Making: Communication and the Group Process (1990) (McGraw Hill, New York) Google Scholar
• Fiske A. P., Kitayama S., Markus H. R., Nisbett R. E., Gilbert D. T., Fiske S. T., Lindzey G. The cultural matrix of social psychology. The Handbook of Social Psychology (1998) Vol. 2(McGraw Hill, New York) 915–981Google Scholar
• Gigone D., Hastie R. Proper analysis of the accuracy of group judgments. Psych. Bull. (1997) 121:149–167Crossref, Google Scholar
• Gonzalez R. When words speak louder than actions: Another’s evaluations can appear more diagnostic than their decisions. Organ. Behavior Human Decision Processes (1994) 58:214–245Crossref, Google Scholar
• Gordon K. Group judgments in the field of lifted weights. J. Experiment. Psych. (1924) 3:398–400Crossref, Google Scholar
• Gordon K. Further observations on group judgments of lifted weights. J. Psych. (1935) 1:105–115Crossref, Google Scholar
• Harvey N., Fischer I. Taking advice: Accepting help, improving judgment, and sharing responsibility. Organ. Behavior Human Decision Processes (1997) 70:117–133Crossref, Google Scholar
• Hastie R., Grofman B., Owen G. Experimental evidence on group accuracy. Information Pooling and Group Decision Making (1986) (JAI Press, Greenwich, CT) 129–157Google Scholar
• Hastie R., Kameda T. The robust beauty of the majority rule. Psych. Rev. (2005) 112:494–508Crossref, Google Scholar
• Hoffrage U., Lindsey S., Hertwig R., Gigerenzer G. Communicating statistical information. Science (2000) 290:2261–2262Crossref, Google Scholar
• Hofstede G.Culture's Consequences (1984) (Sage, Newbury Park, CA) Google Scholar
• Hogarth R. M. A note on aggregating opinions. Organ. Behavior Human Decision Processes (1978) 21:40–46Crossref, Google Scholar
• Hogarth R. M.Educating Intuition (2001) (The University of Chicago Press, Chicago, IL) Google Scholar
• Holland J. H., Holyoak K. J., Nisbett R. E., Thagard P. R.Induction: Processes of Inference, Learning, and Discovery (1986) (MIT Press, Cambridge, MA) Crossref, Google Scholar
• Johnson T. R., Budescu D. V., Wallsten T. S. Averaging probability judgments: Monte Carlo analyses of asymptotic diagnostic values. J. Behavioral Decision Making (2001) 14:123–140Crossref, Google Scholar
• Kahneman D., Frederick S., Gilovich T., Griffin D., Kahneman D. Representativeness revisited: Attribute substitution in intuitive judgment. Heuristics and Biases: The Psychology of Intuitive Judgment (2002) (Cambridge University Press, New York) 49–81Crossref, Google Scholar
• Kelley T. L. The applicability of the Spearman-Brown formula for the measurement of reliability. J. Ed. Psych. (1925) 16:300–303Crossref, Google Scholar
• Kleinmuntz B. Why we still use our heads instead of formulas: Toward an integrative approach. Psych. Bull. (1990) 107:296–310Crossref, Google Scholar
• Knight H. C.A Comparison of the Reliability of Group and Individual Judgments (1921) . Master's thesis, Columbia University, New YorkGoogle Scholar
• Lewis C., Keren G. On the difficulties underlying Bayesian reasoning: A comment on Gigerenzer and Hoffrage. Psych. Rev. (1999) 106:411–416Crossref, Google Scholar
• Lorge I., Fox D., Davitz J., Brenner M. A survey of studies contrasting the quality of group performance and individual performance, 1920–1957. Psych. Bull. (1958) 55:337–372Crossref, Google Scholar
• Messick D. M., Asuncion A. G. The Will Rogers illusion in judgments about social groups. Psych. Sci. (1993) 4:46–48Crossref, Google Scholar
• Nisbett R. E., Ross L.Human Inference: Strategies and Shortcomings of Social Judgment (1980) (Prentice Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ) Google Scholar
• Nisbett R. E., Krantz D. H., Jepson C., Kunda Z. The use of statistical heuristics in everyday inductive reasoning. Psych. Rev. (1983) 90:339–363Crossref, Google Scholar
• Nisbett R. E., Peng K., Choi I., Norenzayan A. Culture and systems of thought: Holistic versus analytic cognition. Psych. Rev. (2001) 108:291–310Crossref, Google Scholar
• Oyserman D., Coon H. M., Kemmelmeier M. Rethinking individualism and collectivism: Evaluation of theoretical assumptions and meta-analyses. Psych. Bull. (2002) 128:3–72Crossref, Google Scholar
• Preston M. G. Note on the reliability and validity of the group judgment. J. Experiment. Psych. (1938) 22:462–471Crossref, Google Scholar
• Raiffa H.The Art and Science of Negotiation (1982) (Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA) Google Scholar
• Ross L., Nisbett R. E.The Person and the Situation: Perspectives of Social Psychology (1991) (McGraw Hill, New York) Google Scholar
• Shaw M. E.Group Dynamics: The Psychology of Small Group Behavior (1976) 2nd edition(McGraw-Hill, New York) Google Scholar
• Simpson E. H. The interpretation of interaction in contingency tables. J. Roy. Statist. Social (Ser. B) (1951) 13:238–241Google Scholar
• Singelis T. M. The measurement of independent and interdependent self-construals: An individual level analysis. Personality Social Psych. Bull. (1994) 20:580–591Crossref, Google Scholar
• Smith M. Group judgments in the field of personality traits. J. Experiment. Psych. (1931) 14:562–565Crossref, Google Scholar
• Soll J. B. Intuitive theories of information: Beliefs about the value of redundancy. Cognitive Psych. (1999) 38:317–346Crossref, Google Scholar
• Soll J. B., Larrick R. P. Strategies for revising judgment: How, and how well, do people use others' opinions? (2005) (Duke University, Durham, NC) Google Scholar
• Sorkin R. D., West R., Robinson D. E. Group performance depends on the majority rule. Psych. Sci. (1998) 9:456–463Crossref, Google Scholar
• Stanovich K. E., West R. F. Individual differences in reasoning: Implications for the rationality debate? Behavioral Brain Sci. (2000) 23:645–665Crossref, Google Scholar
• Steiner I. D.Group Processes and Productivity (1972) (Academic Press, New York) Google Scholar
• Stroop J. R. Is the judgment of the group better than that of the average member of the group? J. Experiment. Psych. (1932) 15:550–562Crossref, Google Scholar
• Surowiecki J.The Wisdom of Crowds: Why the Many Are Smarter than the Few and How Collective Wisdom Shapes Business, Economies, Societies, and Nations (2004) (Doubleday, New York) Google Scholar
• Triandis H.Individualism and Collectivism (1995) (Westview, Boulder, CO) Google Scholar
• Tversky A., Kahneman D. Extensional vs. intuitive reasoning: The conjunction fallacy in probability judgment. Psych. Rev. (1983) 90:293–315Crossref, Google Scholar
• von Winterfeldt D., Edwards W.Decision Analysis and Behavioral Research (1986) (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK) Google Scholar
• Wallsten T. S., Budescu D. V., Erev I., Diederich A. Evaluating and combining subjective probability estimates. J. Behavioral Decision Making (1997) 10:243–268Crossref, Google Scholar
• Watson G. B. Do groups think more efficiently than individuals? J. Abnormal Social Psych. (1928) 23:328–336Crossref, Google Scholar
• White B. Wall Street agrees to mend its ways. The Washington Post (2002) December 21):A1Google Scholar
• Yaniv I. Receiving other people's advice: Influence and benefit. Organ. Behavior Human Decision Processes (2004) 93:1–13Crossref, Google Scholar
• Yaniv I., Kleinberger E. Advice taking in decision making: Egocentric discounting and reputation formation. Organ. Behavior Human Decision Processes (2000) 83:260–281Crossref, Google Scholar