Sat, 26 Jul 2008 08:14:14 BST CiteULike: acslab Bender http://www.citeulike.org/user/acslab/author/Bender CiteULike.org en-gb Copyright © 2004-2008 citeulike.org http://www.citeulike.org/user/acslab/article/2714435 <i>Journal of Experimental Psychology: Applied, Vol. 6, No. 2. (1 June 2000), pp. 130-147.</i><br /><br />The average probability estimate of J > 1 judges is generally better than its components. Two studies test 3 predictions regarding averaging that follow from theorems based on a cognitive model of the judges and idealizations of the judgment situation. Prediction 1 is that the average of conditionally pairwise independent estimates will be highly diagnostic, and Prediction 2 is that the average of dependent estimates (differing only by independent error terms) may be well calibrated. Prediction 3 contrasts between- and within-subject averaging. Results demonstrate the predictions' robustness by showing the extent to which they hold as the information conditions depart from the ideal and as J increases. Practical consequences are that (a) substantial improvement can be obtained with as few as 2–6 judges and (b) the decision maker can estimate the nature of the expected improvement by considering the information conditions. The Effects of Averaging Subjective Probability Estimates Between and Within Judges Dan Ariely Wing Au Randall Bender David Budescu Christiane Dietz Hongbin Gu Thomas Wallsten Gal Zauberman doi:10.1037/1076-898X.6.2.130 Journal of Experimental Psychology: Applied, Vol. 6, No. 2. (1 June 2000), pp. 130-147. 2008-04-24T21:40:37-00:00 2000 Journal of Experimental Psychology: Applied 6 2 130 147 confidence-judgment group subjective-probability