Academic Journal
أعرض في EDS

How generalizable is good judgment? A multi-task, multi-benchmark study

التفاصيل البيبلوغرافية
العنوان: How generalizable is good judgment? A multi-task, multi-benchmark study
المؤلفون: Barbara A. Mellers, Joshua D. Baker, Eva Chen, David R. Mandel, Philip E. Tetlock
المصدر: Judgment and Decision Making, Vol 12, Iss 4, Pp 369-381 (2017)
بيانات النشر: Cambridge University Press, 2017.
سنة النشر: 2017
المجموعة: LCC:Social Sciences
LCC:Psychology
مصطلحات موضوعية: NANAKeywords, Social Sciences, Psychology, BF1-990
الوصف: Good judgment is often gauged against two gold standards – coherence and correspondence. Judgments are coherent if they demonstrate consistency with the axioms of probability theory or propositional logic. Judgments are correspondent if they agree with ground truth. When gold standards are unavailable, silver standards such as consistency and discrimination can be used to evaluate judgment quality. Individuals are consistent if they assign similar judgments to comparable stimuli, and they discriminate if they assign different judgments to dissimilar stimuli. We ask whether “superforecasters”, individuals with noteworthy correspondence skills (see Mellers et al., 2014) show superior performance on laboratory tasks assessing other standards of good judgment. Results showed that superforecasters either tied or out-performed less correspondent forecasters and undergraduates with no forecasting experience on tests of consistency, discrimination, and coherence. While multifaceted, good judgment may be a more unified than concept than previously thought.
نوع الوثيقة: article
وصف الملف: electronic resource
اللغة: English
تدمد: 1930-2975
Relation: http://journal.sjdm.org/17/17408/jdm17408.pdf; https://doaj.org/toc/1930-2975
URL الوصول: https://doaj.org/article/1930e4e5db5843dbb5cc1e9d1bb8f65d
رقم الانضمام: edsdoj.1930e4e5db5843dbb5cc1e9d1bb8f65d
قاعدة البيانات: Directory of Open Access Journals
الوصف
تدمد:19302975