Research bias in judgement bias studies – a systematic review of valuation judgement literature

Abstract

a faculty of economics and Management, hu university of applied sciences, utrecht, the netherlands; b faculty of humanities, utrecht university, utrecht, the netherlands; c faculty of education, hu university of applied sciences, utrecht, the netherlands; d faculty of architecture and the Built environment, Delft university of technology, Delft, the netherlands ABSTRACT Valuation judgement bias has been a research topic for several years due to its proclaimed effect on valuation accuracy. However, little is known on the emphasis of literature on judgement bias, with regard to, for instance, research methodologies, research context and robustness of research evidence. A synthesis of available research will establish consistency in the current knowledge base on valuer judgement, identify future research opportunities and support decision-making policy by educational and regulatory stakeholders how to cope with judgement bias. This article therefore, provides a systematic review of empirical research on real estate valuer judgement over the last 30 years. Based on a number of inclusion and exclusion criteria, we have systematically analysed 32 relevant papers on valuation judgement bias. Although we find some consistency in evidence, we also find the underlying research to be biased; the methodology adopted is dominated by a quantitative approach; research context is skewed by timing and origination; and research evidence seems fragmented and needs replication. In order to obtain a deeper understanding of valuation judgement processes and thus extend the current knowledge base, we advocate more use of qualitative research methods and scholars to adopt an interpretative paradigm when studying judgement behaviour.

How client attachment affects information verification in commercial valuation practice

“…As such, the context of valuation practice does not materially differ from other professional service industries as tax, audit and consulting (Tepalagul and Lin, 2015). However, the topic of judgement bias has been explored only marginally in real estate valuation, contrary to for instance the field of auditing where it has received wide research attention (Trotman et al, 2011;Klamer et al, 2017).…”

Canvas Framework for Performing Systematic Reviews Analysis

“…In the literature three main sources of bias can be identified (i) selection; (ii) calibration; and (iii) confounding (Turner, Boutron, Hróbjartsson, Altman, and Moher, 2013;Klamer, Bakker, and Gruis, 2017). Katikireddi, Egan, and Petticrew (2014) suggest the adoption of the following methods to reduce the risk of bias into the synthesis process: (i) sensitivity analysis; (ii) narrative assessment; and (iii) restricting the synthesis to studies at a lower risk of bias.…”

The Inflated Valuation Problem in Valencia, Spain, and Implications for Firm Size

“…Specifically, behavioural research erupted in real-estate valuation research in the early 1990s. Klamer, Bakker, and Gruis (2017) provide a systematic review of empirical research on real-estate valuer judgements in the last 30 years and analyzed 32 relevant papers. They define the appraiser's bias as the deviation from valuation procedures established to process information.…”