Research generally supports the belief that individuals and groups tend to overestimate the effectiveness of their judgmental decisions. There is, however, little information about how consistently these estimates relate to objective measures of effectiveness. Participants' assessments of the anticipated effectiveness of their judgmental decisions were investigated in several studies. It was found that their estimates were poorly and inconsistently related to objective measures of effectiveness. This result raises a need for improved approaches to assessing judgmental decisions and identifying participants who make more accurate judgmental decisions.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Bass, B. M.When planning for others. Journal of Applied Behavioral Science, 1970, 6, 151-171.
2.
Festinger, L., & Aronson, E.Arousal and reduction of dissonance in social context. In D. Cartwright and A. Zander, Group dynamics: Research and theory. N.Y.: Harper & Row, 1968.
3.
Festinger, L., & Walster, E.Post-decision regret and decision reversal. In L. Festinger, Conflict, decision, and dissonance. Stanford, Calif.: Stanford University Press, 1964.
4.
Hogarth, R.M., & Makridakis, S.Forecasting and planning: An evaluation. Management Science, 1981, 27, 115-138.
5.
Janis, I.L.Victims of groupthink. Boston: Houghton-Mifflin, 1972.
6.
Lichtenstein, S., & Fischhoff, B.Do those who know more also know more about how much they know?Organizational Behavioral and Human Performance, 1977, 20, 159-175.
7.
London, M.Effects of information heterogeneity and representational roles on group member behavior and perceptions. Journal of Applied Psychology, 1977, 62, 76-80.
8.
London, M., & Stumpf, S.A.Effects of candidate characteristics on management promotion decisions: An experimental study. Technical Report, Basic Human Resources Research, American Telephone and Telegraph Company, Morristown, New Jersey, 1980.
9.
Nutt, P.C.The merits of using experts or consumers as members of planning groups: A field experiment in health planning. Academy of Management Journal, 1976, 19, 378-394.
10.
Pfeiffer, J.W., & Jones, J.E.Consensus-seeking: A group ranking task. In A handbook of structured experiences for human relations training (Vol. II). Iowa City: University Associates Press, 1970, 22-25.
11.
Schwab, D.P., Heneman, H.G., & DeCotiis, T.A.Behaviorally anchored rating scales: A review of the literature:Personnel Psychology, 1975, 28, 549-562.
Smith, P.C.Behaviors, results and organizational effectiveness: The problem of criteria. In M.D. Dunnette (Ed.), Handbook of industrial and organizational psychology. Chicago: Rand McNally, 1976, pp. 745-776.
14.
Spool, M.D.Training programs for observers of behavior. A review. Personnel Psychology, 1978, 31, 853-888.
15.
Stumpf, S.A., Freedman, R.D., & Zand, D.E.Judgmental decisions: A study of interactions among group membership, group functioning, and the decision situation. Academy of Management Journal, 1979, 22, 765-782.
16.
Stumpf, S.A., & London, M.Management promotions: Individual and organizational factors affecting the decision process. Academy of Management Review, 1981, 6, 539-550.
17.
Stumpf, S.A., Zand, D.E., & Freedman, R.D.Designing groups for judgmental decisions. Academy of Management Review, 1979, 4, 589-600.
18.
Thornton, G.C., III. Psychometric properties of self-appraisals of job performance. Personnel Psychology, 1980, 33, 263-272.
19.
Van de Ven, A.H., & Delbecq, A.L.The effectiveness of nominal, delphi, and interacting group decision making processes. Academy of Management Journal, 1974, 17, 605-621.
20.
Zand, D.E.Collateral organization: A new change strategy. Journal of Applied Behavior Science, 1974, 10, 63-89.
21.
Zand, D.E.Information, organization and power. New York: McGraw-Hill, 1981.
