IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/huj/dispap/dp285.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

On the Misperception of Variability

Author

Listed:
  • Yaakov Kareev
  • Sharon Arnon
  • Reut Horwitz-Zeliger

Abstract

Ever since the days of Francis Bacon it has been claimed that people perceive the world as less variable and more regular than it actually is. Such misperception, if shown to exist, could explain a host of perplexing behaviors. However, the only evidence supporting the claim is indirect, and there is no explanation of its cause. As a possible cause, we suggest the use of sample variability as an estimate of population variability. This is so since the sampling distribution of sample variance is downward attenuated, the attenuation being substantial for sample sizes that people are likely to consider. The results of five experiments show that people use sample variability, uncorrected for sample size, in tasks in which a correction is normatively called for, and indeed perceive variability as smaller than it actually is.

Suggested Citation

  • 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.
    • Handle: RePEc:huj:dispap:dp285
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://ratio.huji.ac.il/sites/default/files/publications/dp285.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Citations

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


    Cited by:

    1. 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.
    2. Crosetto, Paolo & Filippin, Antonio & Katuščák, Peter & Smith, John, 2020. "Central tendency bias in belief elicitation," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 78(C).
    3. 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.
    4. repec:cup:judgdm:v:4:y:2009:i:6:p:447-460 is not listed on IDEAS
    5. 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.
    6. 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.
    7. 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.
    8. 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.
    9. repec:cup:judgdm:v:15:y:2020:i:2:p:214-229 is not listed on IDEAS
    10. 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.
    11. 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.
    12. 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.
    13. Sulian Wang & Chen Wang, 2021. "Quantile Judgments of Lognormal Losses: An Experimental Investigation," Decision Analysis, INFORMS, vol. 18(1), pages 78-99, March.

    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:huj:dispap:dp285. 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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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: Michael Simkin (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/crihuil.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.