Cross-Cultural Variations in Probability Judgment Accuracy: Beyond General Knowledge Overconfidence?

Yates, JoAnne; Lee, Ju Whei; Shinotsuka, Hiromi; Patalano, Andrea L.; Sieck, Winston R.

doi:10.1006/obhd.1998.2771

Cited by 195 publications

(109 citation statements)

References 21 publications

(38 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Differences in decision making along this cultural divide have already been found for confidence judgments (Phillips & Wright, 1977;Yates, Lee, Shinotsuka, Patalano, & Sieck, 1998), risk assessment (Hsee & Weber, 1999;Weber & Hsee, 1998), and preferred decision making style . Furthermore, it is unknown whether components of indecisiveness are universal or whether cultural differences might exist, such as in the relationship between effortful decision making and negative emotion.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 86%

Cross-cultural exploration of the Indecisiveness Scale: A comparison of Chinese and American men and women

Patalano

Wengrovitz

2006

Personality and Individual Differences

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 86%

Cross-cultural exploration of the Indecisiveness Scale: A comparison of Chinese and American men and women

Patalano

Wengrovitz

2006

Personality and Individual Differences

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…Research evidence suggests that overconfidence persists across cultures and domains, and can be robust to feedback (Harvey, 1997;Sieck & Arkes, 2005;Yates, Lee, Shinotsuka, Patalano, & Sieck, 1998). Yet some have argued that empirical evidence of overconfidence may be a consequence of artificial and unfamiliar tasks.…”

Section: On the Importance Of Forecastingmentioning

confidence: 99%

Confidence Calibration in a Multiyear Geopolitical Forecasting Competition

et al. 2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This research examines the development of confidence and accuracy over time in the context of forecasting. Although overconfidence has been studied in many contexts, little research examines its progression over long periods of time or in consequential policy domains. This study employs a unique data set from a geopolitical forecasting tournament spanning three years in which thousands of forecasters predicted the outcomes of hundreds of events. We sought to apply insights from research to structure the questions, interactions, and elicitations to improve forecasts. Indeed, forecasters’ confidence roughly matched their accuracy. As information came in, accuracy increased. Confidence increased at approximately the same rate as accuracy, and good calibration persisted. Nevertheless, there was evidence of a small amount of overconfidence (3%), especially on the most confident forecasts. Training helped reduce overconfidence, and team collaboration improved forecast accuracy. Together, teams and training reduced overconfidence to 1%. Our results provide reason for tempered optimism regarding confidence calibration and its development over time in consequential field contexts. This paper was accepted by Yuval Rottenstreich, judgment and decision making.

show abstract

“…Research evidence suggests that overconfidence persists across cultures and domains and can be robust to feedback (Harvey 1997, Sieck and Arkes 2005, Yates et al 1998). Yet, some have argued that empirical evidence of overconfidence may be a consequence of artificial and unfamiliar tasks.…”

Section: On the Importance Of Forecastingmentioning

confidence: 99%

Confidence Calibration in a Multi-year Geopolitical Forecasting Competition

Swift

Minster²,

Mellers³

et al. 2016

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This research examines the development of confidence and accuracy over time in the context of forecasting. Although overconfidence has been studied in many contexts, little research examines its progression over long periods of time or in consequential policy domains. This study employs a unique data set from a geopolitical forecasting tournament spanning three years in which thousands of forecasters predicted the outcomes of hundreds of events. We sought to apply insights from research to structure the questions, interactions, and elicitations to improve forecasts. Indeed, forecasters’ confidence roughly matched their accuracy. As information came in, accuracy increased. Confidence increased at approximately the same rate as accuracy, and good calibration persisted. Nevertheless, there was evidence of a small amount of overconfidence (3%), especially on the most confident forecasts. Training helped reduce overconfidence and team collaboration improved forecast accuracy. Together, teams and training reduced overconfidence to 1%. Our results provide reason for tempered optimism regarding confidence calibration and its development over time in consequential field contexts.

show abstract

Cross-Cultural Variations in Probability Judgment Accuracy: Beyond General Knowledge Overconfidence?

Cited by 195 publications

References 21 publications

Cross-cultural exploration of the Indecisiveness Scale: A comparison of Chinese and American men and women

Cross-cultural exploration of the Indecisiveness Scale: A comparison of Chinese and American men and women

Confidence Calibration in a Multiyear Geopolitical Forecasting Competition

Confidence Calibration in a Multi-year Geopolitical Forecasting Competition

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About