Abstract
Behavioral decision research has demonstrated that value and uncertainty judgments of decision makers and experts are subject to numerous biases. Individual biases can be either cognitive, such as overconfidence, or motivational, such as wishful thinking. In addition, when making judgements in groups, decision makers and experts might be affected by group-level biases. These biases can create serious challenges to decision analysts, who need judgments as inputs to a decision or risk analysis model, because they can degrade the quality of the analysis. This chapter identifies individual and group biases relevant for decision and risk analysis and suggests tools for debiasing judgements for each type of bias.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Notes
- 1.
For a compiled list see: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_cognitive_biases.
References
Allais M (1953) Le Comportement de l’Homme Rationnel devant le Risque: Critique des Postulats et Axiomes de l’Ecole Americaine. Econometrica 21:503–546. doi:10.2307/1907921
Arkes HR (1991) Costs and benefits of judgment errors: implications for debiasing. Psychol Bull 110:486–498. doi:10.1037/0033-2909.110.3.486
Arkes HR, Blumer C (1985) The psychology of sunk cost. Organ Behav Hum Decis Process 35:124–140. doi:10.1016/0749-5978(85)90049-4
Bar-Hillel M (1980) The base-rate fallacy in probability judgments. Acta Psychol 44:211–233. doi:10.1016/0001-6918(80)90046-3
Bar-Hillel M, Budescu DV, Amar M (2008) Predicting World Cup results: do goals seem more likely when they pay off? Psychon Bull Rev 15:278–283. doi:10.3758/PBR.15.2.278
Bazerman MH, Moore DA (2013) Judgment in managerial decision making, 8th edn. Wiley, Hoboken, NJ
Bond SD, Carlson KA, Keeney RL (2010) Improving the generation of decision objectives. Decis Anal 7:238–255
Bond SD, Carlson KA, Keeney RL (2008) Generating objectives: can decision makers articulate what they want? Manag Sci 54:56–70. doi:10.1287/mnsc.1070.0754
Borcherding K, von Winterfeldt D (1988) The effect of varying value trees on multiattribute evaluations. Acta Psychol 68:153–170. doi:10.1016/0001-6918(88)90052-2
Butler AB, Scherer LL (1997) The effects of elicitation aids, knowledge, and problem content on option quantity and quality. Organ Behav Hum Decis Process 72:184–202. doi:10.1006/obhd.1997.2737
Chapin J (2001) Self-protective pessimism: optimistic bias in reverse. N Am J Psychol 3:253–262
Connolly T, Dean D (1997) Decomposed versus holistic estimates of effort required for software writing tasks. Manag Sci 43:1029–1045
Del Rio Vilas VJ, Voller F, Montibeller G, Franco LA, Sribhashyam S, Watson E, Hartley M, Gibbens JC (2013) An integrated process and management tools for ranking multiple emerging threats to animal health. Prev Vet Med 108:94–102. doi:10.1016/j.prevetmed.2012.08.007
Dillon RL, John R, von Winterfeldt D (2002) Assessment of cost uncertainties for large technology projects: a methodology and an application. Interfaces 32:52–66. doi:10.1287/inte.32.4.52.56
Dolinski D, Gromski W, Zawisza E (1987) Unrealistic pessimism. J Soc Psychol 127:511–516. doi:10.1080/00224545.1987.9713735
Ecken P, Gnatzy T, von der Gracht HA (2011) Desirability bias in foresight: Consequences for decision quality based on Delphi results. Technol Forecast Soc Chang 78:1654–1670. doi:10.1016/j.techfore.2011.05.006
Eisenhardt KM (1989) Making fast strategic decisions in high-velocity environments. Acad Manag J 32:543–576. doi:10.2307/256434
Ferretti V, Guney S, Montibeller G, von Winterfeldt D (2016) Testing best practices to reduce the overconfidence bias in multi-criteria decision analysis. IEEE:1547–1555. doi:10.1109/HICSS.2016.195
Ferretti V, Montibeller G (2016) Key challenges and meta-choices in designing and applying multi-criteria spatial decision support systems. Decis Support Syst 84:41–52. doi:10.1016/j.dss.2016.01.005
Finucane ML, Alhakami A, Slovic P, Johnson SM (2000) The affect heuristic in judgments of risks and benefits. J Behav Decis Mak 13:1–17. doi:10.1002/(SICI)1099-0771(200001/03)13:1<1::AID-BDM333>3.0.CO;2-S
Fischer GW (1995) Range sensitivity of attribute weights in multiattribute value models. Organ Behav Hum Decis Process 62:252–266. doi:10.1006/obhd.1995.1048
Fischer GW, Damodaran N, Laskey KB, Lincoln D (1987) Preferences for proxy attributes. Manag Sci 33:198–214
Fischhoff B, Slovic P, Lichtenstein S (1978) Fault trees: sensitivity of estimated failure probabilities to problem representation. J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform 4:330–344. doi:10.1037/0096-1523.4.2.330
Fox CR, Bardolet D, Lieb D (2005) Partition dependence in decision analysis, resource allocation, and consumer choice. In: Zwick R, Rapoport A (eds) Experimental business research, Marketing, accounting, and cognitive perspectives, vol III. Springer, Dordrecht, pp 229–251
Fox CR, Clemen RT (2005) Subjective probability assessment in decision analysis: partition dependence and bias toward the ignorance prior. Manag Sci 51:1417–1432
Franco LA, Montibeller G (2010) Facilitated modelling in operational research. Eur J Oper Res 205:489–500. doi:10.1016/j.ejor.2009.09.030
Frisch D (1993) Reasons for framing effects. Organ Behav Hum Decis Process 54:399–429. doi:10.1006/obhd.1993.1017
Furnham A, Boo HC (2011) A literature review of the anchoring effect. J Socio-Econ 40:35–42. doi:10.1016/j.socec.2010.10.008
Gabrielli WF, von Winterfeldt D (1978) Are importance weights sensitive to the range of alternatives in multiattribute utility measurement? (No. 78–6), Research Report. Los Angeles, CA, Research Report 78-6, Social Science Research Institute, University of Southern California
Gilovich T, Griffin DW, Kahneman D (2002) Heuristics and biases: the psychology of intuitive judgement. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge
Hershey JC, Schoemaker PJH (1985) Probability versus certainty equivalence methods in utility measurement: are they equivalent? Manag Sci 31:1213–1231
Institute of Medicine (ed) (2013) Environmental decisions in the face of uncertainty. The National Academies, Washington, DC
Isenberg DJ (1986) Group polarization: a critical review and meta-analysis. J Pers Soc Psychol 50:1141–1151. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.50.6.1141
Jacobi SK, Hobbs BF (2007) Quantifying and mitigating the splitting bias and other value tree-induced weighting biases. Decis Anal 4:194–210. doi:10.1287/deca.1070.0100
Janis IL (1983) Groupthink: psychological studies of policy decisions and fiascoes. Houghton Mifflin, Boston, MA
Jargowsky PA (2005) Omitted variable bias. In: Encyclopedia of social measurement, vol 2. Elsevier, New York, pp 919–924
Jones PE, Roelofsma PHMP (2000) The potential for social contextual and group biases in team decision-making: biases, conditions and psychological mechanisms. Ergonomics 43:1129–1152. doi:10.1080/00140130050084914
Kahneman D, Slovic P, Tversky A (1982) Judgment under uncertainty: heuristics and biases. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge
Kahneman D, Tversky A (1979) Prospect theory: an analysis of decision under risk. Econometrica 47:263–291. doi:10.2307/1914185
Kahneman D, Tversky A (1973) On the psychology of prediction. Psychol Rev 80:237–251. doi:10.1037/h0034747
Keeney RL (2002) Common mistakes in making value trade-offs. Oper Res 50:935–945
Kerr NL, Tindale RS (2011) Group-based forecasting?: A social psychological analysis. Int J Forecast 27:14–40. doi:10.1016/j.ijforecast.2010.02.001
Kerr NL, Tindale RS (2004) Group performance and decision making. Annu Rev Psychol 55:623–655. doi:10.1146/annurev.psych.55.090902.142009
Klayman J (1995) Varieties of confirmation bias. In: Busemeyer J, Hastie R, Medin D (eds) Psychology of learning and motivation, Decision making from a cognitive perspective, vol 32. Academic, New York, NY, pp 365–418
Krizan Z, Windschitl PD (2007) The influence of outcome desirability on optimism. Psychol Bull 133:95–121. doi:10.1037/0033-2909.133.1.95
Kühberger A (1998) The influence of framing on risky decisions: a meta-analysis. Organ Behav Hum Decis Process 75:23–55. doi:10.1006/obhd.1998.2781
Kunda Z (1990) The case for motivated reasoning. Psychol Bull 108:480–498. doi:10.1037/0033-2909.108.3.480
Lamm H (1988) A review of our research on group polarization: eleven experiments on the effects of group discussion on risk acceptance, probability estimation, and negotiation positions. Psychol Rep 62:807–813. doi:10.2466/pr0.1988.62.3.807
Larrick RP (2007) Debiasing. In: Koehler DJ, Harvey N (eds) Blackwell handbook of judgment and decision making. Blackwell, Malden, MA, pp 316–338
Legrenzi P, Girotto V, Johnson-Laird PN (1993) Focussing in reasoning and decision making. Cognition 49:37–66. doi:10.1016/0010-0277(93)90035-T
Legrezni P, Girotto V (1996) Mental models in reasoning and decision making. In: Oakhill J, Garnham A (eds) Mental models in cognitive science: essays in honour of Phil Johnson-Laird. Psychology, Hove, pp 95–118
Levin IP, Schneider SL, Gaeth GJ (1998) All frames are not created equal: a typology and critical analysis of framing effects. Organ Behav Hum Decis Process 76:149–188
Lichtenstein S, Fischhoff B (1977) Do those who know more also know more about how much they know? Organ Behav Hum Perform 20:159–183. doi:10.1016/0030-5073(77)90001-0
Lichtenstein S, Fischhoff B, Phillips LD (1982) In: Kahneman D, Slovic P, Tversky A (eds) Calibration of probabilities: the state of the art to 1980. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp 306–334
Lichtenstein S, Slovic P, Fischhoff B, Layman M, Combs B (1978) Judged frequency of lethal events. J Exp Psychol Hum Learn Mem 4:551–578. doi:10.1037/0278-7393.4.6.551
Lin S-W, Bier VM (2008) A study of expert overconfidence. Reliab Eng Syst Saf 93:711–721. doi:10.1016/j.ress.2007.03.014
Marks G, von Winterfeldt D (1984) “Not in my back yard”: influence of motivational concerns on judgments about a risky technology. J Appl Psychol 69:408–415. doi:10.1037/0021-9010.69.3.408
Mehle T (1982) Hypothesis generation in an automobile malfunction inference task. Acta Psychol 52:87–106. doi:10.1016/0001-6918(82)90028-2
Milkman KL, Chugh D, Bazerman MH (2009) How can decision making be improved? Perspect Psychol Sci 4:379–383. doi:10.1111/j.1745-6924.2009.01142.x
Molden DC, Higgins ET (2012) Motivated thinking. In: Holyoak KJ, Morrison RG (eds) The Oxford handbook of thinking and reasoning. Oxford University Press, New York, pp 390–409
Montibeller G, von Winterfeldt D (2015) Cognitive and motivational biases in decision and risk analysis. Risk Anal 35:1230–1251. doi:10.1111/risa.12360
Moore DA, Healy PJ (2008) The trouble with overconfidence. Psychol Rev 115:502–517. doi:10.1037/0033-295X.115.2.502
Morton A, Airoldi M, Phillips LD (2009) Nuclear risk management on stage: a decision analysis perspective on the UK’s Committee on Radioactive Waste Management. Risk Anal 29:764–779. doi:10.1111/j.1539-6924.2008.01192.x
Mussweiler T, Strack F (2001) The semantics of anchoring. Organ Behav Hum Decis Process 86:234–255. doi:10.1006/obhd.2001.2954
Nickerson RS (1998) Confirmation bias: a ubiquitous phenomenon in many guises. Rev Gen Psychol 2:175–220. doi:10.1037/1089-2680.2.2.175
Nutt PC (1998) How decision makers evaluate alternatives and the influence of complexity. Manag Sci 44:1148–1166
Ofir C (2000) Ease of recall vs recalled evidence in judgment: experts vs laymen. Organ Behav Hum Decis Process 81:28–42. doi:10.1006/obhd.1999.2864
Payne JW, Bettman JR, Schkade DA, Schwarz N, Gregory R (1999) Measuring constructed preferences: towards a building code. J Risk Uncertain 19:243–270
Phillips LD (2007) Decision conferencing. In: Edwards W, Miles RF, von Winterfeldt D (eds) Advances in decision analysis: from foundations to applications. Cambridge University Press, New York, NY, pp 375–399
Pitz GF, Sachs NJ, Heerboth J (1980) Procedures for eliciting choices in the analysis of individual decisions. Org Behav Hum Perform 26:396–408. doi:10.1016/0030-5073(80)90075-6
Plous S (1995) A comparison of strategies for reducing interval overconfidence in group judgments. J Appl Psychol 80:443–454. doi:10.1037/0021-9010.80.4.443
Poulton EC (1989) Bias in quantifying judgements. Erlbaum, Hove
Poulton EC (1982) Biases in quantitative judgements. Appl Ergon 13:31–42. doi:10.1016/0003-6870(82)90129-6
Pöyhönen M, Vrolijk H, Hämäläinen RP (2001) Behavioral and procedural consequences of structural variation in value trees. Eur J Oper Res 134:216–227. doi:10.1016/S0377-2217(00)00255-1
Ross L, Greene D, House P (1977) The “false consensus effect”: an egocentric bias in social perception and attribution processes. J Exp Soc Psychol 13:279–301. doi:10.1016/0022-1031(77)90049-X
Rottenstreich Y, Hsee CK (2001) Money, kisses, and electric shocks: on the affective psychology of risk. Psychol Sci 12:185–190. doi:10.1111/1467-9280.00334
Russo JE, Schoemaker PJH (1989) Decision traps: ten barriers to brilliant decision-making and now to overcome them. Doubleday, New York, NY
Schoemaker PJH, Hershey JC (1992) Utility measurement: signal, noise, and bias. Organ Behav Hum Decis Process 52:397–424. doi:10.1016/0749-5978(92)90027-5
Seybert N, Bloomfield R (2009) Contagion of wishful thinking in markets. Manag Sci 55:738–751. doi:10.1287/mnsc.1080.0973
Siegrist M, Sütterlin B (2014) Human and nature-caused hazards: the affect heuristic causes biased decisions. Risk Anal 34:1482–1494. doi:10.1111/risa.12179
Slovic P, Finucane ML, Peters E, MacGregor DG (2004) Risk as analysis and risk as feelings: some thoughts about affect, reason, risk, and rationality. Risk Anal 24:311–322. doi:10.1111/j.0272-4332.2004.00433.x
Sniezek JA (1990) A comparison of techniques for judgmental forecasting by groups with common information. Group Organ Stud 15:5–19. doi:10.1177/105960119001500102
Thomas RP, Dougherty MRP, Sprenger AM, Harbison JI (2008) Diagnostic hypothesis generation and human judgment. Psychol Rev 115:155–185. doi:10.1037/0033-295X.115.1.155
Tichy G (2004) The over-optimism among experts in assessment and foresight. Technol Forecast Soc Chang 71:341–363. doi:10.1016/j.techfore.2004.01.003
Tversky A, Kahneman D (1992) Advances in prospect theory: cumulative representation of uncertainty. J Risk Uncertain 5:297–323. doi:10.1007/BF00122574
Tversky A, Kahneman D (1983) Extensional versus intuitive reasoning: the conjunction fallacy in probability judgment. Psychol Rev 90:293–315. doi:10.1037/0033-295X.90.4.293
Tversky A, Kahneman D (1981) The framing of decisions and the psychology of choice. Science 211:453–458. doi:10.1126/science.7455683
Tversky A, Kahneman D (1974) Judgment under uncertainty: heuristics and biases. Science 185:1124–1131. doi:10.1126/science.185.4157.1124
Tversky A, Kahneman D (1973) Availability: a heuristic for judging frequency and probability. Cogn Psychol 5:207–232. doi:10.1016/0010-0285(73)90033-9
von Nitzsch R, Weber M (1993) The effect of attribute ranges on weights in multiattribute utility measurements. Manag Sci 39:937–943
von Winterfeldt D (1999) On the relevance of behavioral decision research for decision analysis. In: Shanteau J, Mellers BA, Schum DA (eds) Decision science and technology: reflections on the contributions of ward edwards. Kluwer, Norwell, pp 133–154
von Winterfeldt D, Edwards W (1986) Decision analysis and behavioral research. Cambridge University Press, New York, NY
Wänke M, Schwarz N, Bless H (1995) The availability heuristic revisited: experienced ease of retrieval in mundane frequency estimates. Acta Psychol 89:83–90. doi:10.1016/0001-6918(93)E0072-A
Weber EU, Böckenholt U, Hilton DJ, Wallace B (1993) Determinants of diagnostic hypothesis generation: effects of information, base rates, and experience. J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn 19:1151–1164. doi:10.1037/0278-7393.19.5.1151
Weber M, Eisenfuhr F, von Winterfeldt D (1988) The effects of splitting attributes on weights in multiattribute utility measurement. Manag Sci 34:431–445
Weinstein ND (1980) Unrealistic optimism about future life events. J Pers Soc Psychol 39:806–820. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.39.5.806
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2018 Springer International Publishing AG
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Montibeller, G., von Winterfeldt, D. (2018). Individual and Group Biases in Value and Uncertainty Judgments. In: Dias, L., Morton, A., Quigley, J. (eds) Elicitation. International Series in Operations Research & Management Science, vol 261. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-65052-4_15
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-65052-4_15
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-319-65051-7
Online ISBN: 978-3-319-65052-4
eBook Packages: Business and ManagementBusiness and Management (R0)