The Effects of Subject-Defined Categories on Judgmental Accuracy in Confidence Assessment Tasks |
| |
| Institution: | 1. College of Business Administration, Texas Tech University;2. Carlson School of Management, University of Minnesota;3. Terry College of Business, University of Georgia;1. Division of Strategy, Management & Organization, Nanyang Business School, 50 Nanyang Avenue, Singapore 639798, Singapore;2. Department of Marketing, INSEAD, Singapore, 1 Ayer Rajah Ave, Singapore;3. Department of Psychology, Kokoro Research Center, Kyoto University, 46 Shimoadachi, Yoshida Sakyo, Kyoto, Japan;4. National University of Singapore Business School, 15 Kent Ridge Drive, Singapore 119245, Singapore;5. Department of Industrial Engineering and Management, M.S. Ramaiah Institute of Technology, Mathikere, Bangalore, India;1. Department of Psychology, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, USA;2. Department of Psychology, University of California, Los Angeles, USA;1. School of Hospitality & Tourism Management, University of Surrey, Guildford, Surrey, GU2 7XH, UK;2. Wanda Hotels & Resorts, 93 Jianguo Road, Beijing 100020, China;3. Faculty of International Tourism and Management, City University of Macau, 407 N Building, Avenida Padre Tomás Pereira Taipa, Macau, China;1. School of Business Administration, Chongqing Technology and Business University, Chongqing 400067, PR China;2. Desautels Faculty of Management, McGill University, Montreal, QC H3A 1G5, Canada |
| |
| Abstract: | The accuracy of confidence judgments can be determined using measures of discrimination and calibration. The present paper utilizes a new assessment methodology that decomposes the confidence assessment task, allowing us to investigate discrimination and calibration skills in greater depth than has been done in previous studies. Researchers investigating the goodness of confidence judgments have typically grouped forecasters' assessments into experimenter-defined categories, generally in equal widths of .10. In the present research, subjects created their own categories and later assigned confidence judgments to the categories, separating the tasks of discriminating categories (discrimination) and assigning numbers to categories (calibration). Further, the typical assessment procedure assumes that subjects are able to discriminate equally across the confidence scale. Since subjects in the present study defined their own assessment categories, they could locate those categories at any point on the scale. A final issue of interest was whether subjects were able to determine accurately the number of categories into which they could discriminate. Sixty subjects performed 1 of 2 tasks, general knowledge or forecasting, in both relatively easy and relatively hard conditions. Results showed a trade-off in performance: Calibration generally became worse as the number of categories increased, while discrimination generally improved. Overall accuracy was not affected by the number of categories used. Further, subjects partitioned categories more at the high end of the scale. Finally, measures showed that subjects were not accurate in their beliefs about their own discrimination ability. |
| |
| Keywords: | |
| 本文献已被 ScienceDirect 等数据库收录！ |
|
