The present study used both judgments of strength of relationship and measures of the ability to predict one variable from another to assess subjects' sensitivity to the covariation of two continuous variables. In addition, one group of subjects judged strength of relationship after merely observing the presentation of 60 pairs of two-digit numbers, and a second group made strength judgments after being actively engaged in predicting one member of a pair when given the other. The prediction and judgment data provide different pictures of subjects' sensitivity to covariation. The subjects were quite poor at estimating strength of relationship but, by some measures, good at predicting one variable from another. Judgments were not strongly influenced by whether subjects had previously engaged in overt prediction. The implications of these results for the literature on covariation estimation are discussed.The ability to detect relationships between events in the environment and to use knowledge about these relationships to make predictions has come to be regarded as an important component of human intelligence. As Crocker (1981, p. 272) pointed out, "knowing whether events are related, and how strongly they are related, enables individuals to explain the past, control the present, and predict the future."The large literature that is concerned with people's ability to judge the degree to which imperfectly related events covary has often been characterized as indicating that people are poor at assessing covariation (e.g., Nisbett & Ross, 1980). Most research in the field has dealt with binary variables (e.g., presence or absence of symptom and presence or absence of disease), so that all cases fall into one of the cells of a 2 X 2 table. Empirical studies and theoretical analyses have been aimed at exploring reasons why performance is often poor and at delineating circumstances under which subjects tend to be more or less accurate according to some statistical measure of relationship (for reviews, see Alloy & Tabachnik, 1984;Crocker, 1981).The ability to estimate covariation between variables that can take on more than two values has also been characterized as being quite poor (e.g., Nisbett & Ross, 1980), despite the fact that few estimation studies have employed nonbinary variables and the fact that the older studies cited as providing evidence of conservatism (Beach & Scopp, 1966; Edick & Mills, 1967) by Beach and Scopp (1966) was a rating of degree of confidence that the relationship was positive or negative, whereas subjects in the Edick and Mills (1967) study made more than 1,000 covariationjudgments over 10 sessions.Jennings, Amabile, and Ross (1982) had subjects make covariationjudgments for several types of "theory-free" bivariate distributions in which the product-moment correlation (r) varied between 0 and 1. In one condition, after briefly studying 10 number pairs, subjects first judged whether the relationship between members of pairs was positive or negative, then indicated their subjective impression ...
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.