IDEAS home Printed from
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Does Decision Quality (Always) Increase with the Size of Information Samples? Some Vicissitudes in Applying the Law of Large Numbers


  • Yaakov Kareev


  • Klaus Fiedler


Adaptive decision-making requires that environmental contingencies between decision options and their relative advantages and disadvantages be assessed accurately and quickly. The research presented in this article addresses the challenging notion that contingencies may be more visible from small than large samples of observations. An algorithmic account for such a "less-is-more" effect is offered within a threshold-based decision framework. Accordingly, a choice between a pair of options is only made when the contingency in the sample that describes the relative utility of the two options exceeds a critical threshold. Small samples – due to their instability and the high dispersion of their sampling distribution – facilitate the generation of above-threshold contingencies. Across a broad range of parameter values, the resulting small-sample advantage in terms of hits is stronger than their disadvantage in terms of false alarms. Computer simulations and experimental findings support the predictions derived from the threshold model. In general, the relative advantage of small samples is most apparent when information loss is low, when decision thresholds are high, and when ecological contingencies are weak to moderate.

Suggested Citation

  • Yaakov Kareev & Klaus Fiedler, 2004. "Does Decision Quality (Always) Increase with the Size of Information Samples? Some Vicissitudes in Applying the Law of Large Numbers," Discussion Paper Series dp347, The Federmann Center for the Study of Rationality, the Hebrew University, Jerusalem.
  • Handle: RePEc:huj:dispap:dp347

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL:
    Download Restriction: no

    References listed on IDEAS

    1. Gigerenzer, Gerd & Todd, Peter M. & ABC Research Group,, 2000. "Simple Heuristics That Make Us Smart," OUP Catalogue, Oxford University Press, number 9780195143812.
    2. Rosenthal,Robert, 2009. "Judgment Studies," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521101479, April.
    3. Rosenthal,Robert, 1987. "Judgment Studies," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521331913, April.
    4. G. Kuder & M. Richardson, 1937. "The theory of the estimation of test reliability," Psychometrika, Springer;The Psychometric Society, vol. 2(3), pages 151-160, September.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    More about this item

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:


    Access and download statistics


    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:huj:dispap:dp347. 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: (Michael Simkin). General contact details of provider: .

    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.