Literature DB >> 20702868

Sample size bias in the estimation of means.

Andrew R Smith1, Paul C Price.   

Abstract

The present research concerns the hypothesis that intuitive estimates of the arithmetic mean of a sample of numbers tend to increase as a function of the sample size; that is, they reflect a systematic sample size bias. A similar bias has been observed when people judge the average member of a group of people on an inferred quantity (e.g., a disease risk; see Price, 2001; Price, Smith, & Lench, 2006). Until now, however, it has been unclear whether it would be observed when the stimuli were numbers, in which case the quantity need not be inferred, and "average" can be precisely defined as the arithmetic mean. In two experiments, participants estimated the arithmetic mean of 12 samples of numbers. In the first experiment, samples of from 5 to 20 numbers were presented simultaneously and participants quickly estimated their mean. In the second experiment, the numbers in each sample were presented sequentially. The results of both experiments confirmed the existence of a systematic sample size bias.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2010        PMID: 20702868     DOI: 10.3758/PBR.17.4.499

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Psychon Bull Rev        ISSN: 1069-9384


  6 in total

1.  A group size effect on personal risk judgments: implications for unrealistic optimism.

Authors:  P C Price
Journal:  Mem Cognit       Date:  2001-06

2.  The construction of large number representations in adults.

Authors:  Hilary Barth; Nancy Kanwisher; Elizabeth Spelke
Journal:  Cognition       Date:  2003-01

3.  Hierarchical number estimation.

Authors:  Jay Friedenberg; William Limratana
Journal:  Psychol Res       Date:  2004-01-16

4.  The effect of target group size on risk judgments and comparative optimism: the more, the riskier.

Authors:  Paul C Price; Andrew R Smith; Heather C Lench
Journal:  J Pers Soc Psychol       Date:  2006-03

5.  Anchors aweigh: a demonstration of cross-modality anchoring and magnitude priming.

Authors:  Daniel M Oppenheimer; Robyn A LeBoeuf; Noel T Brewer
Journal:  Cognition       Date:  2007-02-06

6.  Man as an intuitive statistician.

Authors:  Cameron R Peterson; Lee Roy Beach
Journal:  Psychol Bull       Date:  1967-07       Impact factor: 17.737

  6 in total
  3 in total

1.  Anomalies in the detection of change: When changes in sample size are mistaken for changes in proportions.

Authors:  Klaus Fiedler; Yaakov Kareev; Judith Avrahami; Susanne Beier; Florian Kutzner; Mandy Hütter
Journal:  Mem Cognit       Date:  2016-01

2.  Reversed better-than-average effect in direct comparisons of nonsocial stimuli depends on the set size.

Authors:  Jakub Niewiarowski; Jerzy J Karyłowski; Karolina Szutkiewicz-Szekalska; Marzena Cypryańska
Journal:  Mem Cognit       Date:  2014-05

3.  Exaggerated groups: amplification in ensemble coding of temporal and spatial features.

Authors:  Shoko Kanaya; Masamichi J Hayashi; David Whitney
Journal:  Proc Biol Sci       Date:  2018-05-30       Impact factor: 5.349

  3 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.