Aggregation of opinions based on correlated cues and advisors

Abstract

We study the process by which decision makers (DMs) aggregate probabilistic opinions from multiple, correlated sources with a special emphasis on the determinants of the DM's confidence, which is a predictor of the DM's willingness to accept the implications of the aggregation process. Our model assumes that (a) DM combines the advisors' opinions by weighting them according to the amount of information underlying them, and (b) the DM's confidence increases as a function of a variety of factors that reduce the variance of the aggregate. We report results of three studies that manipulate the predictive validity of the cues and their inter-correlations. Most of the models' predictions are supported but, contrary to the model's prediction, the DMs' confidence is not sensitive to the inter-cue correlation. The best predictors of the DMs' confidence are the perceived predictability of the event, the level of agreement among the advisors, and the advisors' self-reports of confidence. This pattern of results is explained by the 'system neglect' hypothesis.

Evaluating advisors: A policy‐capturing study under conditions of complete and missing information

“…In fact, decision-makers' perceptions of advice usefulness are positively correlated with their receptiveness to advice and their intentions to implement the recommendation (MacGeorge, Feng, Butler, & Budarz, 2004; see also Gino, Shang, & Croson, 2009 for a discussion on advice informativeness). Satisfaction with the advisor (MacGeorge et al, 2004) and trust in the advisor should also be positively related to advice utilization, as should decision-makers' post-advice confidence (e.g., Budescu & Rantilla, 2000;Budescu, Rantilla, Yu, & Karelitz, 2003;Budescu & Yu, 2007). With the exception of advice usefulness and post-advice confidence, little attention has been given to correlates of advice utilization.…”

“…Therefore, modeling several advisor characteristics simultaneously allows us to determine not only whether each characteristic is important, but also which is most and least important in determining decision-makers' evaluations of advisors. A similar approach was used by Budescu and Yu (2007), who looked at the relative importance of various factors affecting decision-makers' confidence in their decision when confronted with multiple advisors. Accordingly, we assess the impact of each advisor characteristic on decision-makers' evaluations of advisors not in isolation but instead after controlling for other characteristics.…”

Ellsberg Re-Revisited: An Experiment Disentangling Model Uncertainty and Risk Aversion

“…Third, and analogously to what has been previously reported for risk aversion Laury, 2002, 2005), we find that model uncertainty 3 Experts are individuals who presumably have more information and/or expertise than the decision maker. In in our particular context, experts may be defined as in Budescu and Yu (2007), as individuals who: "(a) have access to information that can shed new light on, or reduce uncertainty about, the possible outcomes of their decisions, and/or (b) have the expertise and qualifications that are necessary to interpret the available information, and/or (c) can provide confidence enhancing psychological support". In real life situations these experts could for example be scientists/scientific studies when the decision is that of a policy maker having to choose environmental targets, financial advisors when it concerns individual saving decisions, doctors and specialists for medical decisions, or even family members or friends when personal matters are at issue.…”

Advice from Experience: Communicating Incomplete Information Incompletely

“…For instance, patients expect their doctors to have both formal training and treated similar illnesses before. In general, experience and expertise mediate the influence that an adviser has on decision makers (DMs) (Bonaccio & Dalal, 2006;Budescu & Yu, 2007;Jungermann & Fischer, 2005;Sniezek & van Swol, 2001). People prefer to take advice from experienced advisers (Harvey & Fischer, 1997), and advisers' expertise is a key predictor of receptiveness to advice (Feng & MacGeorge, 2006).…”