IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/jobhdp/v81y2000i2p195-225.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The Binary Additivity of Subjective Probability Does not Indicate the Binary Complementarity of Perceived Certainty

Author

Listed:
  • Windschitl, Paul D.

Abstract

No abstract is available for this item.

Suggested Citation

  • Windschitl, Paul D., 2000. "The Binary Additivity of Subjective Probability Does not Indicate the Binary Complementarity of Perceived Certainty," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 81(2), pages 195-225, March.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:jobhdp:v:81:y:2000:i:2:p:195-225
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0749-5978(99)92876-5
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Thomas S. Wallsten & David V. Budescu & Rami Zwick, 1993. "Comparing the Calibration and Coherence of Numerical and Verbal Probability Judgments," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 39(2), pages 176-190, February.
    2. Van Wallendael, Lori Robinson, 1989. "The quest for limits on noncomplementarity in opinion revision," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 43(3), pages 385-405, June.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Windschitl, Paul D. & Young, Michael E., 2001. "The Influence of Alternative Outcomes on Gut-Level Perceptions of Certainty," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 85(1), pages 109-134, May.
    2. Onkal, Dilek & Yates, J. Frank & Simga-Mugan, Can & Oztin, Sule, 2003. "Professional vs. amateur judgment accuracy: The case of foreign exchange rates," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 91(2), pages 169-185, July.
    3. Teigen, Karl Halvor, 2001. "When Equal Chances = Good Chances: Verbal Probabilities and the Equiprobability Effect," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 85(1), pages 77-108, May.
    4. Richard Brody & John Coulter & Alireza Daneshfar, 2003. "Auditor Probability Judgments: Discounting Unspecified Possibilities," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 54(2), pages 85-104, March.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. David V. Budescu & Timothy R. Johnson, 2011. "A model-based approach for the analysis of the calibration of probability judgments," Judgment and Decision Making, Society for Judgment and Decision Making, vol. 6(8), pages 857-869, December.
    2. repec:cup:judgdm:v:13:y:2018:i:6:p:607-621 is not listed on IDEAS
    3. Wallsten, Thomas S. & Diederich, Adele, 2001. "Understanding pooled subjective probability estimates," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 41(1), pages 1-18, January.
    4. FOSCHI, Matteo; SANTOS-PINTO, Luís Pedro, 2017. "Subjective Performance Evaluation of Employees with Biased Beliefs," Economics Working Papers ECO 2017/08, European University Institute.
    5. Andrew Austin & Nathaniel T. Wilcox, 2004. "Believing in Economic Theory: Sex, Lies, Evidence, Trust and Ideology," CERGE-EI Working Papers wp238, The Center for Economic Research and Graduate Education - Economics Institute, Prague.
    6. repec:cup:judgdm:v:6:y:2011:i:8:p:857-869 is not listed on IDEAS
    7. Bender, Randall H., 1998. "Judgment and Response Processes across Two Knowledge Domains," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 75(3), pages 222-257, September.
    8. Kazuya Nakayachi & Branden B. Johnson & Kazuki Koketsu, 2018. "Effects of Acknowledging Uncertainty about Earthquake Risk Estimates on San Francisco Bay Area Residents’ Beliefs, Attitudes, and Intentions," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 38(4), pages 666-679, April.
    9. McKenzie, Craig R. M., 1997. "Underweighting Alternatives and Overconfidence," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 71(2), pages 141-160, August.
    10. Nathan F. Dieckmann & Paul Slovic & Ellen M. Peters, 2009. "The Use of Narrative Evidence and Explicit Likelihood by Decisionmakers Varying in Numeracy," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 29(10), pages 1473-1488, October.
    11. Christopher W. Karvetski & David R. Mandel, 2020. "Coherence of probability judgments from uncertain evidence: Does ACH help?," Judgment and Decision Making, Society for Judgment and Decision Making, vol. 15(6), pages 939-958, November.
    12. Aurélien Baillon, 2008. "Eliciting Subjective Probabilities Through Exchangeable Events: An Advantage and a Limitation," Decision Analysis, INFORMS, vol. 5(2), pages 76-87, June.
    13. Posavac, Steven S. & Kardes, Frank R. & Josko Brakus, J., 2010. "Focus induced tunnel vision in managerial judgment and decision making: The peril and the antidote," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 113(2), pages 102-111, November.
    14. repec:cup:judgdm:v:15:y:2020:i:6:p:939-958 is not listed on IDEAS
    15. Eric Van den Steen, 2011. "Overconfidence by Bayesian-Rational Agents," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 57(5), pages 884-896, May.
    16. Constance H. McLaren & Bruce J. McLaren, 2014. "Possible or Probable? An Experiential Approach to Probability Literacy," INFORMS Transactions on Education, INFORMS, vol. 14(3), pages 129-136, May.
    17. David V. Budescu & Eva Chen, 2015. "Identifying Expertise to Extract the Wisdom of Crowds," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 61(2), pages 267-280, February.
    18. Wallsten, Thomas S. & Gu, Hongbin, 2003. "Distinguishing choice and subjective probability estimation processes: Implications for theories of judgment and for cross-cultural comparisons," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 90(1), pages 111-123, January.
    19. Bruce Lyons & Gordon Douglas Menzies & Daniel John Zizzo, 2009. "Professional interpretation of the standard of proof: An experimental test on merger regulation," Working Paper series, University of East Anglia, Centre for Behavioural and Experimental Social Science (CBESS) 09-16, School of Economics, University of East Anglia, Norwich, UK..
    20. Stephen K. Asare & Gregory M. Trompeter & Arnold M. Wright, 2000. "The Effect of Accountability and Time Budgets on Auditors' Testing Strategies," Contemporary Accounting Research, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 17(4), pages 539-560, December.
    21. Windschitl, Paul D. & Young, Michael E., 2001. "The Influence of Alternative Outcomes on Gut-Level Perceptions of Certainty," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 85(1), pages 109-134, May.
    22. David R. Mandel & Christopher W. Karvetski & Mandeep K. Dhami, 2018. "Boosting intelligence analysts’ judgment accuracy: What works, what fails?," Judgment and Decision Making, Society for Judgment and Decision Making, vol. 13(6), pages 607-621, November.
    23. Piercey, M. David, 2009. "Motivated reasoning and verbal vs. numerical probability assessment: Evidence from an accounting context," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 108(2), pages 330-341, March.

    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:eee:jobhdp:v:81:y:2000:i:2:p:195-225. 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.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with 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: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/obhdp .

    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.