Literature DB >> 10471362

Overconfidence: It Depends on How, What, and Whom You Ask.

.   

Abstract

Many studies have reported that the confidence people have in their judgments exceeds their accuracy and that overconfidence increases with the difficulty of the task. However, some common analyses confound systematic psychological effects with statistical effects that are inevitable if judgments are imperfect. We present three experiments using new methods to separate systematic effects from the statistically inevitable. We still find systematic differences between confidence and accuracy, including an overall bias toward overconfidence. However, these effects vary greatly with the type of judgment. There is little general overconfidence with two-choice questions and pronounced overconfidence with subjective confidence intervals. Over- and underconfidence also vary systematically with the domain of questions asked, but not as a function of difficulty. We also find stable individual differences. Determining why some people, some domains, and some types of judgments are more prone to overconfidence will be important to understanding how confidence judgments are made. Copyright 1999 Academic Press.

Entities:  

Year:  1999        PMID: 10471362     DOI: 10.1006/obhd.1999.2847

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Organ Behav Hum Decis Process        ISSN: 0749-5978


  20 in total

Review 1.  A computational framework for the study of confidence in humans and animals.

Authors:  Adam Kepecs; Zachary F Mainen
Journal:  Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci       Date:  2012-05-19       Impact factor: 6.237

2.  A simple remedy for overprecision in judgment.

Authors:  Uriel Haran; Don A Moore; Carey K Morewedge
Journal:  Judgm Decis Mak       Date:  2010-12

3.  The disutility of the hard-easy effect in choice confidence.

Authors:  Edgar C Merkle
Journal:  Psychon Bull Rev       Date:  2009-02

4.  Are People Overoptimistic about the Effects of Heavy Drinking?

Authors:  Frank A Sloan; Lindsey M Eldred; Tong Guo; Yanzhi Xu
Journal:  J Risk Uncertain       Date:  2013-08-01

5.  Unskilled and unaware in the classroom: College students' desired grades predict their biased grade predictions.

Authors:  Michael J Serra; Kenneth G DeMarree
Journal:  Mem Cognit       Date:  2016-10

6.  Estimating the cost of regulating genome edited crops: expert judgment and overconfidence.

Authors:  Rim Lassoued; Peter W B Phillips; Stuart J Smyth; Hayley Hesseln
Journal:  GM Crops Food       Date:  2019-05-09       Impact factor: 3.074

7.  The relation between personality and the realism in confidence judgements in older adults.

Authors:  Mats Dahl; Carl Martin Allwood; Mikael Rennemark; Bo Hagberg
Journal:  Eur J Ageing       Date:  2010-09-25

8.  The use of expert elicitation in environmental health impact assessment: a seven step procedure.

Authors:  Anne B Knol; Pauline Slottje; Jeroen P van der Sluijs; Erik Lebret
Journal:  Environ Health       Date:  2010-04-26       Impact factor: 5.984

9.  INAPPROPRIATE CONFIDENCE AND RETIREMENT PLANNING: FOUR STUDIES WITH A NATIONAL SAMPLE.

Authors:  Andrew M Parker; Wändi Bruine de Bruin; Joanne Yoong; Robert Willis
Journal:  J Behav Decis Mak       Date:  2011-06-15

10.  Roles of medial prefrontal cortex and orbitofrontal cortex in self-evaluation.

Authors:  Jennifer S Beer; Michael V Lombardo; Jamil Palacios Bhanji
Journal:  J Cogn Neurosci       Date:  2010-09       Impact factor: 3.225

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.