IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pone00/0097686.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Are All Data Created Equal? - Exploring Some Boundary Conditions for a Lazy Intuitive Statistician

Author

Listed:
  • Marcus Lindskog
  • Anders Winman

Abstract

The study investigated potential effects of the presentation order of numeric information on retrospective subjective judgments of descriptive statistics of this information. The studies were theoretically motivated by the assumption in the naïve sampling model of independence between temporal encoding order of data in long-term memory and retrieval probability (i.e. as implied by a ”random sampling” from memory metaphor). In Experiment 1, participants experienced Arabic numbers that varied in distribution shape/variability between the first and the second half of the information sequence. Results showed no effects of order on judgments of mean, variability or distribution shape. To strengthen the interpretation of these results, Experiment 2 used a repeated judgment procedure, with an initial judgment occurring prior to the change in distribution shape of the information half-way through data presentation. The results of Experiment 2 were in line with those from Experiment 1, and in addition showed that the act of making explicit judgments did not impair accuracy of later judgments, as would be suggested by an anchoring and insufficient adjustment strategy. Overall, the results indicated that participants were very responsive to the properties of the data while at the same time being more or less immune to order effects. The results were interpreted as being in line with the naïve sampling models in which values are stored as exemplars and sampled randomly from long-term memory.

Suggested Citation

  • Marcus Lindskog & Anders Winman, 2014. "Are All Data Created Equal? - Exploring Some Boundary Conditions for a Lazy Intuitive Statistician," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 9(5), pages 1-10, May.
    • Handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0097686
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0097686
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0097686
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0097686&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pone.0097686?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
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Yaakov Kareev & Sharon Arnon & Reut Horwitz-Zeliger, 2002. "On the Misperception of Variability," Discussion Paper Series dp285, The Federmann Center for the Study of Rationality, the Hebrew University, Jerusalem.
    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. Myrto Pantazi & Olivier Klein & Mikhail Kissine, 2020. "Is justice blind or myopic? An examination of the effects of meta-cognitive myopia and truth bias on mock jurors and judges," Judgment and Decision Making, Society for Judgment and Decision Making, vol. 15(2), pages 214-229, March.
    2. Greg Barron & Eldad Yechiam, 2009. "The coexistence of overestimation and underweighting of rare events and the contingent recency effect," Judgment and Decision Making, Society for Judgment and Decision Making, vol. 4(6), pages 447-460, October.
    3. Crosetto, Paolo & Filippin, Antonio & Katuščák, Peter & Smith, John, 2020. "Central tendency bias in belief elicitation," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 78(C).
    4. Yaakov Kareev & Massimo Warglien, 2003. "Cognitive Overload and the Evaluation of Risky Alternatives: The Effects of Sample Size, Information Format and Attitude To Risk," Discussion Paper Series dp340, The Federmann Center for the Study of Rationality, the Hebrew University, Jerusalem.
    5. Erel Avineri & Joseph Prashker, 2006. "The Impact of Travel Time Information on Travelers’ Learning under Uncertainty," Transportation, Springer, vol. 33(4), pages 393-408, July.
    6. Innocenti, Alessandro & Lattarulo, Patrizia & Pazienza, Maria Grazia, 2013. "Car stickiness: Heuristics and biases in travel choice," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 25(C), pages 158-168.
    7. Sulian Wang & Chen Wang, 2021. "Quantile Judgments of Lognormal Losses: An Experimental Investigation," Decision Analysis, INFORMS, vol. 18(1), pages 78-99, March.
    8. repec:cup:judgdm:v:4:y:2009:i:6:p:447-460 is not listed on IDEAS
    9. Yaakov Kareev & Klaus Fiedler, 2003. "On the Accentuation of Contingencies: The Sensitive Research Designer versus the Intuitive Statistician," Discussion Paper Series dp346, The Federmann Center for the Study of Rationality, the Hebrew University, Jerusalem.
    10. Alessandro Innocenti & Patrizia Lattarulo & Maria Grazia Pazienza, 2009. "Heuristics and Biases in Travel Mode Choice," Labsi Experimental Economics Laboratory University of Siena 027, University of Siena.
    11. Jordan Tong & Daniel Feiler, 2017. "A Behavioral Model of Forecasting: Naive Statistics on Mental Samples," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 63(11), pages 3609-3627, November.
    12. repec:cup:judgdm:v:15:y:2020:i:2:p:214-229 is not listed on IDEAS

    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:plo:pone00:0097686. 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: plosone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ .

    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.