IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/xrs/sfbmaa/07-16.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

The Role of Surprise in Hindsight Bias – A Metacognitive Model of Reduced and Reversed Hindsight Bias

Author

Listed:
  • Müller, Patrick A.

    (Department of Social and Organizational Psychology, Utrecht University)

  • Stahlberg, Dagmar

    (Lehrstuhl fuer Sozialpsychologie, Sonderforschungsbereich 504)

Abstract

Hindsight bias is the well researched phenomenon that people falsely believe that they would have correctly predicted the outcome of an event once it is known. In recent years, several authors have doubted the ubiquity of the effect and have reported a reversal under certain conditions. This article presents an integrative model on the role of surprise as one factor explaining the malleability of the hindsight bias. Three ways in which surprise influences the reconstruction of pre-outcome predictions are assumed: (1) Surprise is used as direct metacognitive heuristic to estimate the distance between outcome and prediction. (2) Surprise triggers a deliberate sense-making process, and (3) also biases this process by enhancing the retrieval of surprise-congruent information and expectancy-based hypothesis testing.

Suggested Citation

  • Müller, Patrick A. & Stahlberg, Dagmar, 2007. "The Role of Surprise in Hindsight Bias – A Metacognitive Model of Reduced and Reversed Hindsight Bias," Sonderforschungsbereich 504 Publications 07-16, Sonderforschungsbereich 504, Universität Mannheim;Sonderforschungsbereich 504, University of Mannheim.
    • Handle: RePEc:xrs:sfbmaa:07-16
    Note: Financial support from the Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft, SFB 504, at the University of Mannheim, is gratefully acknowledged.
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sfb504.uni-mannheim.de/publications/dp07-16.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Stahlberg, Dagmar & Eller, Frank & Maass, Anne & Frey, Dieter, 1995. "We Knew It All Along: Hindsight Bias in Groups," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 63(1), pages 46-58, July.
    2. Christensen-Szalanski, Jay J. J. & Willham, Cynthia Fobian, 1991. "The hindsight bias: A meta-analysis," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 48(1), pages 147-168, February.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Engel, Christoph & Kube, Sebastian & Kurschilgen, Michael, 2021. "Managing expectations: How selective information affects cooperation and punishment in social dilemma games," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 187(C), pages 111-136.
    2. Fessel, Florian & Epstude, Kai & Roese, Neal J., 2009. "Hindsight bias redefined: It's about time," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 110(1), pages 56-64, September.
    3. Julien Geissmar & Thomas Niemand & Sascha Kraus, 2023. "Surprisingly unsustainable: How and when hindsight biases shape consumer evaluations of unsustainable and sustainable products," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 32(8), pages 5969-5991, December.

    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. Boris Maciejovsky & Tarek El-Sehitya & Hans Haumerb & Christian Helmensteinc & Erich Kirchlerd, "undated". "Hindsight Bias and Individual Risk Attitude within the Context of Experimental Asset Markets," Papers on Strategic Interaction 2002-16, Max Planck Institute of Economics, Strategic Interaction Group.
    2. Müller, Patrick A. & Stahlberg, Dagmar, 2007. "The role of surprise in hindsight bias : a metacognitive model of reduced and reversed hindsight bias," Papers 07-16, Sonderforschungsbreich 504.
    3. Lukas Meub & Till Proeger, 2018. "Are groups ‘less behavioral’? The case of anchoring," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 85(2), pages 117-150, August.
    4. Cartwright, Edward & Wooders, Myrna, 2020. "Own experience bias in evaluating the efforts of others," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 173(C), pages 164-178.
    5. Dominik Bauer & Irenaeus Wolff, 2018. "Biases in Beliefs: Experimental Evidence," TWI Research Paper Series 109, Thurgauer Wirtschaftsinstitut, Universität Konstanz.
    6. Danz, David, 2020. "Never underestimate your opponent: Hindsight bias causes overplacement and overentry into competition," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 124(C), pages 588-603.
    7. Cassar, Gavin & Craig, Justin, 2009. "An investigation of hindsight bias in nascent venture activity," Journal of Business Venturing, Elsevier, vol. 24(2), pages 149-164, March.
    8. repec:cup:judgdm:v:6:y:2011:i:8:p:870-881 is not listed on IDEAS
    9. Folli, Dominik & Wolff, Irenaeus, 2022. "Biases in belief reports," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 88(C).
    10. Ofir, Chezy & Mazursky, David, 1997. "Does a Surprising Outcome Reinforce or Reverse the Hindsight Bias?," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 69(1), pages 50-57, January.
    11. Haoran He & Marie Claire Villeval, 2014. "Are teams less inequality averse than individuals?," Post-Print halshs-01077253, HAL.
    12. Bauer, Dominik & Wolff, Irenaeus, 2019. "Biases in Beliefs," VfS Annual Conference 2019 (Leipzig): 30 Years after the Fall of the Berlin Wall - Democracy and Market Economy 203601, Verein für Socialpolitik / German Economic Association.
    13. Long Luu & Alan A Stocker, 2021. "Categorical judgments do not modify sensory representations in working memory," PLOS Computational Biology, Public Library of Science, vol. 17(6), pages 1-28, June.
    14. He, Haoran & Villeval, Marie Claire, 2017. "Are group members less inequality averse than individual decision makers?," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 138(C), pages 111-124.
    15. Schuett, Florian & Wagner, Alexander K., 2011. "Hindsight-biased evaluation of political decision makers," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 95(11), pages 1621-1634.
    16. Palmeira, Mauricio & Spassova, Gerri & Keh, Hean Tat, 2015. "Other-serving bias in advice-taking: When advisors receive more credit than blame," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 130(C), pages 13-25.
    17. Tamar Kugler & Edgar E. Kausel & Martin G. Kocher, 2012. "Are Groups more Rational than Individuals? A Review of Interactive Decision Making in Groups," CESifo Working Paper Series 3701, CESifo.
    18. Fessel, Florian & Epstude, Kai & Roese, Neal J., 2009. "Hindsight bias redefined: It's about time," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 110(1), pages 56-64, September.
    19. Meub, Lukas & Proeger, Till, 2016. "Are groups 'less behavioral'? The case of anchoring," University of Göttingen Working Papers in Economics 188 [rev.], University of Goettingen, Department of Economics.
    20. Maria Pollai & Erik Hoelzl & Flavia Possas, 2010. "Consumption-related emotions over time: Fit between prediction and experience," Marketing Letters, Springer, vol. 21(4), pages 397-411, December.
    21. Kerr, Norbert L. & Tindale, R. Scott, 2011. "Group-based forecasting?: A social psychological analysis," International Journal of Forecasting, Elsevier, vol. 27(1), pages 14-40, January.

    More about this item

    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:xrs:sfbmaa:07-16. 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: Carsten Schmidt (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/sfmande.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.