Role thinking: Standing in other people's shoes to forecast decisions in conflicts

International Journal of Forecasting

Volumn 27, Issue 1, 2011, Pages 69-80

  Green, Kesten C ^a   Armstrong, J Scott ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF SOUTH AUSTRALIA   (Australia)

^b UNIVERSITY OF PENNSYLVANIA   (United States)

Author keywords

Combining forecasts; Evaluating forecasts; Expert judgment; Group decision making; Organizational behavior; Perspective taking; Role playing; Simulated interaction; Unaided judgment

Indexed keywords

EID: 78149495883     PISSN: 01692070     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.ijforecast.2010.05.001     Document Type: Article

References (21)

1. Armstrong J.S. The seer-sucker theory: the value of experts in forecasting. Technology Review 1980, 83(June-July):18-24.
2. Armstrong J.S. Role playing. Principles of forecasting 2001, 13-30. Kluwer Academic Publishers, Boston, MA. J.S. Armstrong (Ed.).
3. Armstrong J.S. Significance tests harm progress in forecasting. International Journal of Forecasting 2007, 23:321-327.
4. Babcock L., Loewenstein G., Issacharoff S., Camerer C. Biased judgments of fairness in bargaining. The American Economic Review 1995, 85:1337-1343.
5. Chamberlin T.C. The method of multiple working hypotheses. Science 1965, 148:754-759. Reprint of an 1890 paper.
6. Cyert R.M., March J.G., Starbuck W.H. Two experiments on bias and conflict in organizational estimation. Management Science 1961, 7:254-264.
7. Epley N., Keysar B., van Boven L., Gilovich T. Perspective taking as egocentric anchoring and adjustment. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 2004, 87:327-339.
8. Fischhoff B. Hindsight foresight: the effect of outcome knowledge on judgment under uncertainty. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance 1975, 104:288-299.
9. Galinsky A.D., Mussweiler T. First offers as anchors: The role of perspective-taking and negotiator focus. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 2001, 81:657-669.
10. Green K.C. Forecasting decisions in conflict situations: a comparison of game theory, role-playing, and unaided judgement. International Journal of Forecasting 2002, 18:321-344.
11. Green K.C. Game theory, simulated interaction, and unaided judgment for forecasting decisions in conflicts: further evidence. International Journal of Forecasting 2005, 21:463-472.
12. Green K.C., Armstrong J.S. The value of expertise for forecasting decisions in conflicts. Interfaces 2007, 37:287-299.
13. Green K.C., Armstrong J.S. Structured analogies for forecasting. International Journal of Forecasting 2007, 23:365-376.
14. Hauer E. The harm done by tests of significance. Accident Analysis and Prevention 2004, 36:495-500.
15. Milgram S. Obedience to authority 1974, Harper & Row, New York.
16. Mixon D. Instead of deception. Journal for the Theory of Social Behavior 1972, 2:145-177.
17. Morris E. The fog of war (documentary film) 2003, Sony Pictures Classics, Culver City, CA.
18. Nalebuff B.J., Brandenburger A.M. Co-opetition 1996, Doubleday, New York.
19. Rothbart M., Hallmark W. In-group-out-group differences in the perceived efficacy of coercion and conciliation in resolving social conflict. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 1988, 55:248-257.
20. Tetlock P.E. Expert political judgment 2005, Princeton University Press, Princeton.
21. Ziliak S.T., McCloskey D.N. The cult of statistical significance: How the standard error costs us jobs, justice, and lives 2008, University of Michigan Press, Ann Arbor, MI.