IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/jobhdp/v122y2013i1p80-91.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Just how comparative are comparative judgments?

Author

Listed:
  • Radzevick, Joseph R.
  • Moore, Don A.

Abstract

Three studies investigate the psychology of comparative judgment, examining the circumstances under which judgments tend to concentrate disproportionately on one of the two elements that underlie the comparison (i.e., focused comparisons). We examine these tendencies at the judgment formation and information retrieval stages by examining judgment content as well as the speed and efficiency with which people make comparisons. The results replicate prior findings of differential weighting, indicating that focusing occurs in the formation stage of comparative judgments. However, focusing is absent in the reaction time data, suggesting that both elements of the comparison are equally accessible when individuals retrieve comparison-relevant information. These findings clarify the process by which people arrive at comparative judgments and demonstrate precisely when focused comparisons occur.

Suggested Citation

  • Radzevick, Joseph R. & Moore, Don A., 2013. "Just how comparative are comparative judgments?," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 122(1), pages 80-91.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:jobhdp:v:122:y:2013:i:1:p:80-91
    DOI: 10.1016/j.obhdp.2013.05.001
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0749597813000551
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.obhdp.2013.05.001?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Moore, Don A. & Cain, Daylian M., 2007. "Overconfidence and underconfidence: When and why people underestimate (and overestimate) the competition," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 103(2), pages 197-213, July.
    2. Radzevick, Joseph R. & Moore, Don A., 2008. "Myopic biases in competitions," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 107(2), pages 206-218, November.
    3. Erzo F. P. Luttmer, 2005. "Neighbors as Negatives: Relative Earnings and Well-Being," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 120(3), pages 963-1002.
    4. Moore, Don A., 2004. "Myopic prediction, self-destructive secrecy, and the unexpected benefits of revealing final deadlines in negotiation," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 94(2), pages 125-139, July.
    5. Don A. Moore & John M. Oesch & Charlene Zietsma, 2007. "What Competition? Myopic Self-Focus in Market-Entry Decisions," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 18(3), pages 440-454, June.
    6. Moore, Don A., 2007. "When good = better than average," Judgment and Decision Making, Cambridge University Press, vol. 2(5), pages 277-291, October.
    7. repec:cup:judgdm:v:2:y:2007:i::p:277-291 is not listed on IDEAS
    8. Dan Lovallo & Colin Camerer, 1999. "Overconfidence and Excess Entry: An Experimental Approach," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 89(1), pages 306-318, March.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Moore, Don A. & Klein, William M.P., 2008. "Use of absolute and comparative performance feedback in absolute and comparative judgments and decisions," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 107(1), pages 60-74, September.
    2. Daylian M. Cain & Don A. Moore & Uriel Haran, 2015. "Making sense of overconfidence in market entry," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 36(1), pages 1-18, January.
    3. Uri Simonsohn, 2010. "eBay's Crowded Evenings: Competition Neglect in Market Entry Decisions," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 56(7), pages 1060-1073, July.
    4. Ryvkin, Dmitry & Krajč, Marian & Ortmann, Andreas, 2012. "Are the unskilled doomed to remain unaware?," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 33(5), pages 1012-1031.
    5. Murad, Zahra, 2016. "Does group discussion lead to better informed and more strategic market entry decisions?," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 144(C), pages 25-28.
    6. Robin M. Hogarth & Natalia Karelaia, 2012. "Entrepreneurial Success and Failure: Confidence and Fallible Judgment," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 23(6), pages 1733-1747, December.
    7. Vincent Laferrière & David Staubli & Christian Thöni, 2023. "Explaining Excess Entry in Winner-Take-All Markets," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 69(2), pages 1050-1069, February.
    8. Natalia Karelaia & Robin Hogarth, 2010. "The attraction of uncertainty: Interactions between skill and levels of uncertainty in market-entry games," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 41(2), pages 141-166, October.
    9. Radzevick, Joseph R. & Moore, Don A., 2008. "Myopic biases in competitions," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 107(2), pages 206-218, November.
    10. Oliver Thomas, 2018. "Two decades of cognitive bias research in entrepreneurship: What do we know and where do we go from here?," Management Review Quarterly, Springer, vol. 68(2), pages 107-143, April.
    11. Moore, Don A. & Cain, Daylian M., 2007. "Overconfidence and underconfidence: When and why people underestimate (and overestimate) the competition," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 103(2), pages 197-213, July.
    12. Joon Mahn Lee & Jung Chul Park & Guoli Chen, 2023. "A cognitive perspective on real options investment: CEO overconfidence," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 44(4), pages 1084-1110, April.
    13. Danková, Katarína & Servátka, Maroš, 2019. "Gender robustness of overconfidence and excess entry," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 72(C), pages 179-199.
    14. Raphael Guber & Martin G. Kocher & Joachim Winter, 2021. "Does having insurance change individuals' self‐confidence?," Journal of Risk & Insurance, The American Risk and Insurance Association, vol. 88(2), pages 429-442, June.
    15. repec:cup:judgdm:v:7:y:2012:i:6:p:761-767 is not listed on IDEAS
    16. Zahra Murad & Martin Sefton & Chris Starmer, 2016. "How do risk attitudes affect measured confidence?," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 52(1), pages 21-46, February.
    17. Dubard Barbosa, Saulo & Fayolle, Alain & Smith, Brett R., 2019. "Biased and overconfident, unbiased but going for it: How framing and anchoring affect the decision to start a new venture," Journal of Business Venturing, Elsevier, vol. 34(3), pages 528-557.
    18. Bradler, Christiane, 2015. "How creative are you? An experimental study on self-selection in a competitive incentive scheme for creative performance," ZEW Discussion Papers 15-021, ZEW - Leibniz Centre for European Economic Research.
    19. Brown, Jason L. & Farrington, Sukari & Sprinkle, Geoffrey B., 2016. "Biased self-assessments, feedback, and employees' compensation plan choices," Accounting, Organizations and Society, Elsevier, vol. 54(C), pages 45-59.
    20. Utz Weitzel & Diemo Urbig & Sameeksha Desai & Mark Sanders & Zoltán J. Ács, 2015. "The good, the bad, and the talented: Entrepreneurial talent and selfish behavior," Chapters, in: Global Entrepreneurship, Institutions and Incentives, chapter 2, pages 24-41, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    21. 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.

    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:eee:jobhdp:v:122:y:2013:i:1:p:80-91. 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: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/obhdp .

    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.