IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/pdn/dispap/55.html

Can Experience be Trusted? Investigating the Effect of Experience on Decision Biases in Crowdworking Platforms

Author

Listed:
  • Thomas Görzen

    (University of Paderborn)

Abstract

Companies increasingly involve the crowd for collective decision making and, to aggregate the decisions, they commonly average the scores. By ignoring crowdworkers’ different levels of experience and decision biases, this method may not favor the best outcome. Alternatively, decisions can be weighted in favor of the more experienced judges in the crowd. However, previous research is inconclusive as to whether more experienced individuals are any better at avoiding decision biases. To answer this question, we conduct online crowd-based experiments with a range of treatments, comparing the anchoring effect of individuals with different levels of experience. Results indicate that not only does greater experience not protect crowdworkers from the anchoring effect but it increases their confidence in their decision, compared to less experienced individuals, even if they are wrong. Our findings provide valuable insights for both researchers and practitioners interested in improving the effectiveness of crowdworking decision-making.\\

Suggested Citation

  • Thomas Görzen, 2019. "Can Experience be Trusted? Investigating the Effect of Experience on Decision Biases in Crowdworking Platforms," Working Papers Dissertations 55, Paderborn University, Faculty of Business Administration and Economics.
    • Handle: RePEc:pdn:dispap:55
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://groups.uni-paderborn.de/wp-wiwi/RePEc/pdf/dispap/DP55.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Todd McElroy & Keith Dowd, 2007. "Susceptibility to anchoring effects: How openness-to-experience influences responses to anchoring cues," Judgment and Decision Making, Society for Judgment and Decision Making, vol. 2, pages 48-53, February.
    2. Fleischmann, Marvin & Amirpur, Miglena & Benlian, Alexander & Hess, Thomas, 2014. "Cognitive Biases in Information Systems Research: A Scientometric Analysis," Publications of Darmstadt Technical University, Institute for Business Studies (BWL) 65163, Darmstadt Technical University, Department of Business Administration, Economics and Law, Institute for Business Studies (BWL).
    3. Joyce, Ej & Biddle, Gc, 1981. "Anchoring And Adjustment In Probabilistic Inference In Auditing," Journal of Accounting Research, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 19(1), pages 120-145.
    4. Northcraft, Gregory B. & Neale, Margaret A., 1987. "Experts, amateurs, and real estate: An anchoring-and-adjustment perspective on property pricing decisions," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 39(1), pages 84-97, February.
    5. Jeffrey M Wooldridge, 2010. "Econometric Analysis of Cross Section and Panel Data," MIT Press Books, The MIT Press, edition 2, volume 1, number 0262232588, December.
    6. Barry L. Bayus, 2013. "Crowdsourcing New Product Ideas over Time: An Analysis of the Dell IdeaStorm Community," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 59(1), pages 226-244, June.
    7. Mingfeng Lin & Henry C. Lucas & Galit Shmueli, 2013. "Research Commentary ---Too Big to Fail: Large Samples and the p -Value Problem," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 24(4), pages 906-917, December.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Bertschek, Irene & Kesler, Reinhold, 2022. "Let the user speak: Is feedback on Facebook a source of firms’ innovation?," Information Economics and Policy, Elsevier, vol. 60(C).
    2. Arbel, Yuval & Ben-Shahar, Danny & Gabriel, Stuart, 2014. "Anchoring and housing choice: Results of a natural policy experiment," Regional Science and Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 49(C), pages 68-83.
    3. Kevin Bauer & Andrej Gill, 2024. "Mirror, Mirror on the Wall: Algorithmic Assessments, Transparency, and Self-Fulfilling Prophecies," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 35(1), pages 226-248, March.
    4. Kevin J. Boudreau & Lars B. Jeppesen, 2015. "Unpaid crowd complementors: The platform network effect mirage," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 36(12), pages 1761-1777, December.
    5. Whyte, Glen & Sebenius, James K., 1997. "The Effect of Multiple Anchors on Anchoring in Individual and Group Judgment," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 69(1), pages 74-85, January.
    6. Donoho, Casey L. & Swenson, Michael J., 1996. "Top-down versus bottom-up sales tactics effects on the presentation of a product line," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 37(1), pages 51-61, September.
    7. Yang, Xi & Zhao, Quanwu & Sun, Heshan, 2022. "Seekers’ complaint behavior in crowdsourcing: An uncertainty perspective," Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, Elsevier, vol. 68(C).
    8. Bergers, Dominic, 2022. "The status quo bias and its individual differences from a price management perspective," Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, Elsevier, vol. 64(C).
    9. Chen, Zhe & Kemp, Simon, 2012. "Lie hard: The effect of self-assessments on academic promotion decisions," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 33(3), pages 578-589.
    10. Johnson, Johnnie E. V. & Bruce, Alistair C., 2001. "Calibration of Subjective Probability Judgments in a Naturalistic Setting," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 85(2), pages 265-290, July.
    11. Donoho, Casey L., 2003. "The "top-of-the-line" influence on the buyer-seller relationship," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 56(4), pages 303-309, April.
    12. Víctor Alberto Pena & Alina G�mez-Mej�a, 2019. "Effect of the anchoring and adjustment heuristic and optimism bias in stock market forecasts," Revista Finanzas y Politica Economica, Universidad Católica de Colombia, vol. 11(2), pages 389-409.
    13. Furnham, Adrian & Boo, Hua Chu, 2011. "A literature review of the anchoring effect," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 40(1), pages 35-42, February.
    14. Dominic Bergers, 2021. "Individual differences in the susceptibility of biases relevant in price management: a state-of-the-art article," Journal of Revenue and Pricing Management, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 20(4), pages 497-528, August.
    15. Yao, Xinlin & Zhang, Peiran & Lu, Xianghua & Huang, Lihua, 2020. "Early or Late? Entry timing in online IT service markets and the moderating effects of market characteristics," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 114(C), pages 265-277.
    16. Shuang Liu & Johnnie E.V. Johnson, 2007. "Searching for Anchoring Effects in a Naturalistic Environment: Evidence from the Hong Kong Horserace Betting Market," Journal of Gambling Business and Economics, University of Buckingham Press, vol. 1(1), pages 69-84, February.
    17. Philipp B. Cornelius & Bilal Gokpinar, 2020. "The Role of Customer Investor Involvement in Crowdfunding Success," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 66(1), pages 452-472, January.
    18. Averi Chakrabarti & Karen A Grépin & Stéphane Helleringer, 2019. "The impact of supplementary immunization activities on routine vaccination coverage: An instrumental variable analysis in five low-income countries," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 14(2), pages 1-11, February.
    19. Ichev, Riste & Valentinčič, Aljoša, 2025. "The effect of impact investing on performance of private firms," Research in International Business and Finance, Elsevier, vol. 73(PA).
    20. Huh, Yesol & Kim, You Suk, 2023. "Cheapest-to-deliver pricing, optimal MBS securitization, and welfare implications," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 150(1), pages 68-93.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;

    JEL classification:

    • L86 - Industrial Organization - - Industry Studies: Services - - - Information and Internet Services; Computer Software
    • C93 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Design of Experiments - - - Field Experiments
    • M55 - Business Administration and Business Economics; Marketing; Accounting; Personnel Economics - - Personnel Economics - - - Labor Contracting Devices
    • O32 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Innovation; Research and Development; Technological Change; Intellectual Property Rights - - - Management of Technological Innovation and R&D

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    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:pdn:dispap:55. 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: WP-WiWi-Info (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/fwpadde.html .

    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.