Weighting information from outside sources: A biased process

Journal of Behavioral Decision Making

Volumn 17, Issue 2, 2004, Pages 95-116

  Luan, Shenghua ^a   Sorkin, Robert D ^a,b   Itzkowitz, Jesse ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA   (United States)

^b AIR FORCE OFFICE OF SCIENTIFIC RESEARCH   (United States)

Author keywords

Belief updating; Decision bias; Decision weights; Evidence weighting; Information sources

Indexed keywords

EID: 10044230273     PISSN: 08943257     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1002/bdm.464     Document Type: Article

References (40)

1. Ashton, A. H. (1986). Combining the judgments of experts: how many and which ones? Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Process, 38, 405-414.
2. Birnbaum, M. H., & Stegner, S. E. (1979). Source credibility in social judgment: bias, expertise, and the judge's point of view. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 37, 48-74.
3. Birnbaum, M. H., & Zimmermann, J. M. (1998). Buying and selling prices of investments: configural weight model of interactions predicts violations of joint independence. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 74, 145-187.
4. Brehmer, B., & Joyce, C. R. B. (1988). Human judgment: The SJT view. New York: Elsevier Science.
5. Chaiken, S., & Maheswaran, D. (1994). Heuristic processing can bias systematic processing: effects of source credibility, argument ambiguity, and task importance on attitude judgment. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 66, 460-473.
6. Chapman, G. B., & Robbins, S. J. (1990). Cue interaction in human contingency judgment. Memory and Cognition, 18, 537-545.
7. Clemen, R. T., & Winkler, R. L. (1999). Combining probability distributions from experts in risk analysis. Risk Analysis, 19, 187-203.
8. Cooksey, R. W. (1996). Judgment analysis: Theory, methods, and applications. San Diego: Academic Press.
9. Fishbein, M., & Ajzen, I. (1975). Belief, attitude, intention and behavior: An introduction to theory and research. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.
10. Gigerenzer, G., Todd, P. M., & the ABC Research Group. (1999). Simple heuristics that make us smart. New York: Oxford University Press.
11. Green, D. M., & Swets, J. A. (1966). Signal detection theory and psychophysics. New York: Wiley.
12. Grofman, B., Feld, S. L., & Owen, G. (1984). Group size and the performance of a composite group majority: statistical truths and empirical results. Organizational Behavior and Human Performance, 33, 350-359.
13. Harkins, S., & Petty, R. (1981). The multiple source effect in persuasion: the effect of distraction. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 7, 627-635.
14. Harkins, S., & Petty, R. (1987). Information utility and the multiple source effect. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 52, 260-268.
15. Hogarth, R. M. (1978). A note on aggregating opinions. Organizational Behavior and Human Performance, 21, 40-46.
16. Kahneman, D., & Tversky, A. (1973). On the psychology of prediction. Psychological Review, 80, 237-251.
17. Kimchi, R. (1992). Primacy of wholistic processing and global/local paradigm: a critical review. Psychological Bulletin, 112, 24-38.
18. Lee, J. W., & Yates, J. F. (1992). How quantity judgment changes as the number of cues increases: an analytical framework and review. Psychological Bulletin, 112, 363-377.
19. Maines, L. A. (1996). An experimental examination of subjective forecast combination. International Journal of Forecasting, 12, 223-233.
20. Macmillan, N., & Creelman, C. (1991). Detection theory: A user's guide. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
21. Montgomery, D., & Sorkin, R. (1996). Observer sensitivity to element reliability in a multi-element visual display. Human Factors, 38, 484-494.
22. Nitzan, S., & Paroush, J. (1982). Optimal decision rules in uncertain dichotomous choice situations. International Economic Review. 23, 289-297.
23. Price, P. C., & Yates, J. F. (1993). Judgmental overshadowing: further evidence of cue interaction in contingency judgment, Memory and Cognition, 21, 561-572.
24. Price, P. C., & Yates, J. F. (1995). Associative and rule-based accounts of cue interaction in contingency judgment. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition, 21, 1639-1655.
25. Richards, V., & Zhu, S. (1994). Relative estimates of combination weights, decision criteria, and internal noise based on coefficients. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 95, 423-434.
26. Rescorla, R. A., & Wagner, A. R. (1972). A theory of Pavlovian conditioning: variations in the effectiveness of reinforcement and nonreinforcement. In A. H. Black, & W. F. Prokasy (Eds.), Classical conditioning II: Current theory and research (pp. 64-99). New York: Applenton-Century-Crofts.
27. Shapley, L., & Grofman, B. (1984). Optimizing group judgmental accuracy. Public Choice, 43, 329-343.
28. Simon, H. A. (1956). Rational choice and the structure of environments. Psychological Review, 63, 129-138.
29. Slovic, P. (1966). Cue consistency and cue utilization in judgment. American Journal of Psychology, 79, 427-434.
30. Sniezek, J. A., & Buckley, T. (1995). Cueing and cognitive conflict in judge-advisor decision making. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 62, 159-174.
31. Soll, J. B. (1999). Intuitive theories of information: beliefs about the value of redundancy. Cognitive Psychology, 38, 317-349.
32. Sorkin, R. (1990). Perception of temporal patterns defined by tonal sequences. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 87, 1695-1701.
33. Sorkin, R., & Dai, H. (1994). Signal detection analysis of the ideal group. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 60, 1-13.
34. Sorkin, R., Hays, C., & West, R. (2001). Signal-detection analysis of group decision making. Psychological Review, 108, 183-203.
35. Tanner, W., & Birdsall, T. (1958). Definition of d′ and η as psychological measures. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 30, 922-928.
36. Taylor, S. E., & Fiske, S. T. (1978). Salience, attention and attribution: top of the head phenomena. Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, 11, 249-288.
37. Tucker, L. R. (1964). A suggested alternative formulation in the development by Hursch, Hammond and Hursch, and by Hammond, Hursch and Todd. Psychological Review, 71, 528-530.
38. Tversky, A., Slovic, P., & Sattath, S. (1988). Contingent weighting in judgment and choice. Psychological Review, 95, 371-384.
39. Wallsten, T. S., Budescu, D. V., Erev, I., & Diederich, A. (1997). Evaluating and combining subjective probability estimates. Journal of Behavioral Decision Making, 10, 243-268.
40. Yaniv, I. (1997). Weighting and trimming: heuristics for aggregating judgments under uncertainty. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 69, 237-249.