IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/jobhdp/v85y2001i1p77-108.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

When Equal Chances = Good Chances: Verbal Probabilities and the Equiprobability Effect

Author

Listed:
  • Teigen, Karl Halvor

Abstract

No abstract is available for this item.

Suggested Citation

  • Teigen, Karl Halvor, 2001. "When Equal Chances = Good Chances: Verbal Probabilities and the Equiprobability Effect," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 85(1), pages 77-108, May.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:jobhdp:v:85:y:2001:i:1:p:77-108
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0749-5978(00)92933-9
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    ---><---

    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. Windschitl, Paul D., 2000. "The Binary Additivity of Subjective Probability Does not Indicate the Binary Complementarity of Perceived Certainty," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 81(2), pages 195-225, March.
    2. Klar, Yechiel & Medding, Aviva & Sarel, Dan, 1996. "Nonunique Invulnerability: Singular versus Distributional Probabilities and Unrealistic Optimism in Comparative Risk Judgments," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 67(2), pages 229-245, August.
    3. Teigen, Karl Halvor & Brun, Wibecke, 1999. "The Directionality of Verbal Probability Expressions: Effects on Decisions, Predictions, and Probabilistic Reasoning, , , ," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 80(2), pages 155-190, November.
    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. Teigen, Karl Halvor & Juanchich, Marie & Løhre, Erik, 2022. "What is a “likely” amount? Representative (modal) values are considered likely even when their probabilities are low," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 171(C).
    2. Riege, Anine H. & Teigen, Karl Halvor, 2013. "Additivity neglect in probability estimates: Effects of numeracy and response format," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 121(1), pages 41-52.
    3. Zimmer, Anja & Schade, Christian & Gründl, Helmut, 2009. "Is default risk acceptable when purchasing insurance? Experimental evidence for different probability representations, reasons for default, and framings," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 30(1), pages 11-23, February.

    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. & 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. Silvia Dominguez‐Martinez & Otto H. Swank, 2009. "A Simple Model of Self‐Assessment," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 119(539), pages 1225-1241, July.
    3. repec:cup:judgdm:v:14:y:2019:i:6:p:683-695 is not listed on IDEAS
    4. Miroslav Sirota & Marie Juanchich, 2015. "A direct and comprehensive test of two postulates of politeness theory applied to uncertainty communication," Judgment and Decision Making, Society for Judgment and Decision Making, vol. 10(3), pages 232-240, May.
    5. repec:cup:judgdm:v:16:y:2021:i:2:p:363-393 is not listed on IDEAS
    6. Tuk, Mirjam A. & Verlegh, Peeter W.J. & Smidts, Ale & Wigboldus, Daniël H.J., 2019. "You and I have nothing in common: The role of dissimilarity in interpersonal influence," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 151(C), pages 49-60.
    7. Siegrist, Michael & Cvetkovich, George & Gutscher, Heinz, 2002. "Risk Preference Predictions and Gender Stereotypes," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 87(1), pages 91-102, January.
    8. Menon, Geeta & Kyung, Ellie J. & Agrawal, Nidhi, 2009. "Biases in social comparisons: Optimism or pessimism?," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 108(1), pages 39-52, January.
    9. repec:cup:judgdm:v:17:y:2022:i:2:p:449-486 is not listed on IDEAS
    10. repec:cup:judgdm:v:3:y:2008:i::p:100-110 is not listed on IDEAS
    11. Fast, Nathanael J. & Sivanathan, Niro & Mayer, Nicole D. & Galinsky, Adam D., 2012. "Power and overconfident decision-making," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 117(2), pages 249-260.
    12. Vivianne H. M. Visschers & Ree M. Meertens & Wim W. F. Passchier & Nanne N. K. De Vries, 2009. "Probability Information in Risk Communication: A Review of the Research Literature," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 29(2), pages 267-287, February.
    13. David R. Mandel & Daniel Irwin, 2021. "Facilitating sender-receiver agreement in communicated probabilities: Is it best to use words, numbers or both?," Judgment and Decision Making, Society for Judgment and Decision Making, vol. 16(2), pages 363-393, March.
    14. Suls, Jerry & Chambers, John & Krizan, Zlatan & Mortensen, Chad R. & Koestner, Bryan & Bruchmann, Kathryn, 2010. "Testing four explanations for the better/worse-than-average effect: Single- and multi-item entities as comparison targets and referents," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 113(1), pages 62-72, September.
    15. Don A. Moore, 2007. "When good = better than average," Judgment and Decision Making, Society for Judgment and Decision Making, vol. 2, pages 277-291, October.
    16. repec:cup:judgdm:v:11:y:2016:i:1:p:7-20 is not listed on IDEAS
    17. repec:cup:judgdm:v:4:y:2009:i:1:p:51-63 is not listed on IDEAS
    18. Verena Jung & Sascha L. Schmidt & Benno Torgler, 2012. "What Shapes Young Elite Athletes' Perception of Chances in an Environment of Great Uncertainty?," CREMA Working Paper Series 2012-14, Center for Research in Economics, Management and the Arts (CREMA).
    19. Bilgin, Baler & Brenner, Lyle, 2013. "Context affects the interpretation of low but not high numerical probabilities: A hypothesis testing account of subjective probability," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 121(1), pages 118-128.
    20. Denis Hilton, 2008. "Emotional tone and argumentation in risk communication," Judgment and Decision Making, Society for Judgment and Decision Making, vol. 3, pages 100-110, January.
    21. 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.
    22. repec:wrk:wrkemf:22 is not listed on IDEAS
    23. Kuhn, Kristine M. & Yockey, Mark D., 2003. "Variable pay as a risky choice: Determinants of the relative attractiveness of incentive plans," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 90(2), pages 323-341, March.
    24. Verena Jung & Sascha L. Schmidt & Benno Torgler, 2012. "What Shapes Young Elite Athletes' Perception of Chances in an Environment of Great Uncertainty?," CREMA Working Paper Series 2012-14, Center for Research in Economics, Management and the Arts (CREMA).
    25. Robert Mislavsky & Celia Gaertig, 2022. "Combining Probability Forecasts: 60% and 60% Is 60%, but Likely and Likely Is Very Likely," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 68(1), pages 541-563, January.
    26. Kamphorst, Jurjen J.A. & Swank, Otto H., 2013. "When Galatea cares about her reputation: How having faith in your workers reduces their motivation to shine," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 60(C), pages 91-104.
    27. Max Korbmacher & Ching (Isabelle) Kwan & Gilad Feldman, 2022. "Both better and worse than others depending on difficulty: Replication and extensions of Kruger’s (1999) above and below average effects," Judgment and Decision Making, Society for Judgment and Decision Making, vol. 17(2), pages 449-486, March.

    More about this item

    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:eee:jobhdp:v:85:y:2001:i:1:p:77-108. 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.