IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/inm/ormnsc/v53y2007i11p1731-1744.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Coherence and Consistency of Investors' Probability Judgments

Author

Listed:
  • David V. Budescu

    () (Department of Psychology, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, Champaign, Illinois 61820)

  • Ning Du

    () (School of Accountancy and Management Information Systems, DePaul University, Chicago, Illinois 60604)

Abstract

This study investigates the quality of direct probability judgments and quantile estimates with a focus on calibration and consistency. The two response modes use different measures of miscalibration, so it is difficult to directly compare their relative (in)accuracy. We employed a more refined within-subject design in which decision makers (DMs) used both response modes to make judgments about a random sample of stocks accompanied by identical information to facilitate comparison between the two judgment methods. DMs judged the probabilities that the stocks will reach a certain threshold, provided lower and upper bounds of these forecasts, and estimated median, 50%, 70%, and 90% confidence intervals of their future prices. We found that the judgments were internally consistent and coherent, but in most cases they were slightly miscalibrated. We used several new methods of analysis that allow for more precise and reliable comparison between the two response modes. We inferred point probability estimates for the target events from the confidence intervals and analyzed them by the same methods applied to binary judgments. Interestingly, when we quantified miscalibration in identical fashion for both methods we did not find evidence of differential levels of miscalibration for the probability judgments and the confidence intervals. We discuss the theoretical and practical implications of these results.

Suggested Citation

  • David V. Budescu & Ning Du, 2007. "Coherence and Consistency of Investors' Probability Judgments," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 53(11), pages 1731-1744, November.
  • Handle: RePEc:inm:ormnsc:v:53:y:2007:i:11:p:1731-1744
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.1070.0727
    Download Restriction: no

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Klayman, Joshua & Soll, Jack B. & Gonzalez-Vallejo, Claudia & Barlas, Sema, 1999. "Overconfidence: It Depends on How, What, and Whom You Ask, , , , , , , , ," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 79(3), pages 216-247, September.
    2. Kirchler, Erich & Maciejovsky, Boris, 2002. "Simultaneous Over- and Underconfidence: Evidence from Experimental Asset Markets," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 25(1), pages 65-85, July.
    3. Lawrence, Michael & Goodwin, Paul & O'Connor, Marcus & Onkal, Dilek, 2006. "Judgmental forecasting: A review of progress over the last 25 years," International Journal of Forecasting, Elsevier, vol. 22(3), pages 493-518.
    4. Brad M. Barber & Terrance Odean, 2000. "Trading Is Hazardous to Your Wealth: The Common Stock Investment Performance of Individual Investors," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 55(2), pages 773-806, April.
    5. G.M. Constantinides & M. Harris & R. M. Stulz (ed.), 2003. "Handbook of the Economics of Finance," Handbook of the Economics of Finance, Elsevier, edition 1, volume 1, number 1.
    6. Brad M. Barber & Terrance Odean, 2002. "Online Investors: Do the Slow Die First?," Review of Financial Studies, Society for Financial Studies, vol. 15(2), pages 455-488, March.
    7. Ning Du & David V. Budescu, 2005. "The Effects of Imprecise Probabilities and Outcomes in Evaluating Investment Options," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 51(12), pages 1791-1803, December.
    8. G.M. Constantinides & M. Harris & R. M. Stulz (ed.), 2003. "Handbook of the Economics of Finance," Handbook of the Economics of Finance, Elsevier, edition 1, volume 1, number 2.
    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. Heller, Yuval, 2010. "Overconfidence and risk dispersion," MPRA Paper 25893, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    2. Karl H. Schlag & Joël J. van der Weele, 2015. "A method to elicit beliefs as most likely intervals," Judgment and Decision Making, Society for Judgment and Decision Making, vol. 10(5), pages 456-468, September.
    3. Thomson, Mary E. & Pollock, Andrew C. & Gönül, M. Sinan & Önkal, Dilek, 2013. "Effects of trend strength and direction on performance and consistency in judgmental exchange rate forecasting," International Journal of Forecasting, Elsevier, vol. 29(2), pages 337-353.
    4. Saemi Park & David V. Budescu, 2015. "Aggregating multiple probability intervals to improve calibration," Judgment and Decision Making, Society for Judgment and Decision Making, vol. 10(2), pages 130-143, March.
    5. Polak, George G. & Rogers, David F. & Sweeney, Dennis J., 2010. "Risk management strategies via minimax portfolio optimization," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 207(1), pages 409-419, November.
    6. Du, Ning & Budescu, David V. & Shelly, Marjorie K. & Omer, Thomas C., 2011. "The appeal of vague financial forecasts," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 114(2), pages 179-189, March.
    7. Sonsino, Doron & Regev, Eran, 2013. "Informational overconfidence in return prediction – More properties," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 39(C), pages 72-84.
    8. Langnickel, Ferdinand & Zeisberger, Stefan, 2016. "Do we measure overconfidence? A closer look at the interval production task," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 128(C), pages 121-133.
    9. Julia P. Prims & Don A. Moore, 2017. "Overconfidence over the lifespan," Judgment and Decision Making, Society for Judgment and Decision Making, vol. 12(1), pages 29-41, January.

    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:inm:ormnsc:v:53:y:2007:i:11:p:1731-1744. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Mirko Janc). General contact details of provider: http://edirc.repec.org/data/inforea.html .

    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 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.

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

    IDEAS is a RePEc service hosted by the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis . RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.