IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/cup/judgdm/v15y2020i6p994-1008_9.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

More time, more work: How time limits bias estimates of task scope and project duration

Author

Listed:
  • Goswami, Indranil
  • Urminsky, Oleg

Abstract

We propose that externally induced time limits on a task overly affect predictions of other people’s completion times for that task, due to an over-generalized association between the time available and inferred task scope. We find higher estimates of the time needed to complete a given task by another person when the time limit is longer. While such predictions could be normative when time limits are informative, the effect persists even when the decision-maker knows that the limit is arbitrary and is unknown to the other person, and therefore, cannot affect behavior. Perception of task scope mediates the relationship between time limits and completion time estimates, and weakening the association between time limits and task scope attenuates the effect. The over-learned cognitive bias persists even among experienced decision-makers making estimates in a familiar setting. Our findings have implications for people who make decisions that use judgments of others’ task completion time as an input.

Suggested Citation

  • Goswami, Indranil & Urminsky, Oleg, 2020. "More time, more work: How time limits bias estimates of task scope and project duration," Judgment and Decision Making, Cambridge University Press, vol. 15(6), pages 994-1008, November.
  • Handle: RePEc:cup:judgdm:v:15:y:2020:i:6:p:994-1008_9
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.cambridge.org/core/product/identifier/S1930297500008196/type/journal_article
    File Function: link to article abstract page
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:cup:judgdm:v:15:y:2020:i:6:p:994-1008_9. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Kirk Stebbing (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.cambridge.org/jdm .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.