Osteoporosis international : a journal established as result of cooperation between the European Foundation for Osteoporosis and the National Osteoporosis Foundation of the USA·2024
Osteoporosis international : a journal established as result of cooperation between the European Foundation for Osteoporosis and the National Osteoporosis Foundation of the USA·2021
Osteoporosis international : a journal established as result of cooperation between the European Foundation for Osteoporosis and the National Osteoporosis Foundation of the USA·2020
People
Area of Science:
Cognitive Psychology
Decision Science
Behavioral Economics
Background:
Subjective descriptions of judgment policies are often inaccurate.
Inaccuracies may stem from single-occasion weight reporting, ideal vs. actual response confusion, or difficulty mapping stimulus to response dimensions.
Purpose of the Study:
To investigate factors influencing the accuracy of subjective judgment policy descriptions.
To examine how timing of weight reporting, ideal vs. actual weights, and stimulus-response dimension alignment affect policy description accuracy.
Main Methods:
Participants made sales forecasts using four information cues.
Participants reported weights for each cue during each trial and at the end of all trials.
Participants also reported ideal weights for each cue.
Main Results:
Weights reported on each trial were more accurate than those reported post-task.
Stated actual weights closely matched stated ideal weights.
Weight accuracy improved when forecast and cue dimensions aligned.
Conclusions:
The timing of weight reporting significantly impacts accuracy.
People struggle to differentiate between ideal and actual judgment processes.
Dimensional alignment between cues and responses is crucial for accurate self-assessment of judgment policies.