Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Investing in the stock market: Statistical pooling of individual preference judgments

  • Published:
Annals of Operations Research Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Literature concerning the quality of individual and face-to-face group judgments has generally concluded that both groups and statistically pooled individuals outperform randomly chosen or average individuals. This paper extends previous research by comparing statistically pooled individual judgments of both individuals and face-to-face groups in a stock selection task. In general, decisions that would have resulted from statistically pooled judgments were better (as assessed by future stock value) than those that would have resulted from individual or face-to-face group judgments. In choosing among pooling methods, majority rule is often thought to be a very compelling criterion. However, majority rule can produce intransitive group preferences. Methods that use some procedure to resolve the intransitivities of majority rule did not perform well relative to other non-majority rule based methods. Another class of pooling methods, termed equity methods, used in conjunction with ordinal judgments, are recommended based on simplicity, performance, and fairness criteria. The results are discussed in terms of the nature of the task.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. A.H. Ashton and R.H. Ashton, Aggregating subjective forecasts: Some empirical results, Manag. Sci. 31(1985)1499–1508.

    Google Scholar 

  2. J.-D. de Borda,Mémoire sur les Elections au Scrutin: Histoire de L'Academie Royale des Sciences (1781).

  3. V.J. Bowman and C.S. Colantoni, Majority rule under transitivity constraints, Manag. Sci. 19(1973) 1029–1041.

    Google Scholar 

  4. J.P. Campbell, Individual versus group problem solving in an industrial sample, J. Appl. Psychol. 52(1968)106–112.

    Google Scholar 

  5. C. Castore, Decision making and decision implementation in groups and organizations, in:Managerial Control and Organizational Democracy, ed. B. King, S. Streufert and F. Feidler (Wiley, New York, 1978) pp. 267–275.

    Google Scholar 

  6. G.P.E. Clarkson,Portfolio Selection: A Simulation of Trust Investment (Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ, 1962).

    Google Scholar 

  7. W.D. Cook and L.M. Seiford, Priority ranking and consensus formulation, Manag. Sci. 24(1978)1721–1732.

    Google Scholar 

  8. Condorcet, Marquis de,Essai sur l'Application de l'Analyse à la Probabilité des Décisions Rendues à la Pluralité des Voix (Paris, 1785).

  9. A.H. Copeland, A “reasonable” social welfare function, University of Michigan Seminar on Applications of Mathematics to the Social Sciences (1951).

  10. N.C. Dalkey, The Delphi method: An experimental study of group opinion, RM-5888-PR, The Rand Corporation, Santa Monica, CA (1969).

    Google Scholar 

  11. J.H. Davis,Group Performance (Addison-Wesley, Reading, Mass., 1969).

    Google Scholar 

  12. R.M. Dawes and B. Corrigan, Linear models in decision making, Psychol. Bull. 81(1974)95–106.

    Google Scholar 

  13. J.S. Dyer and R.F. Miles, Jr., An actual application of collective choice theory to the selection of trajectories for the Mariner Jupiter/Saturn 1977 project, Oper. Res. 21(1976)220–244.

    Google Scholar 

  14. H.J. Einhorn and R.M. Hogarth, United weighting schemes for decision making, Organizational Behavior and Human Performance 13(1975)171–192.

    Google Scholar 

  15. H.J. Einhorn, R.M. Hogarth and E. Klempner, Quality of group judgments, Psychol. Bull. 84(1977)158–172.

    Google Scholar 

  16. E.F. Fama and M.H. Miller,The Theory of Finance (Dryden Press, Hinsdale, Ill., 1972).

    Google Scholar 

  17. K. Gordon, A study of esthetic judgments, J. Exp. Psychol. 6(1923)36–43.

    Google Scholar 

  18. W.K. Graham, Acceptance of ideas generated through individual and group brainstorming, J. Soc. Psychol. 101(1977)231–234.

    Google Scholar 

  19. J.R. Hackman and C.G. Morris, Group tasks, group interaction process, and group performance effectiveness: A review and proposed integration, in:Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, ed. L. Berkowitz (Academic Press, New York, 1975), Vol. 8, pp. 45–99.

    Google Scholar 

  20. G.W. Hill, Group versus individual performance: AreN+1 heads better than one?, Psychol. Bull. 91(1982)517–539.

    Google Scholar 

  21. R.M. Hogarth, Cognitive processes and the assessment of subjective probability distributions, J. Amer. Statist. Assoc. 70(1975)271–294.

    Google Scholar 

  22. C.R. Holloman and H.W. Hendrick, Adequacy of group decisions as a function of the decision making process, Academy of Management J. 15(1972)175–184.

    Google Scholar 

  23. G.P. Huber and A. Delbecq, Guidelines for combining the judgments of individual members in decision conferences, Academy of Management J. 15(1972)161–174.

    Google Scholar 

  24. I.L. Janis,Victims of Groupthink (Houghton-Mifflin, Boston, 1972).

    Google Scholar 

  25. I. Lorge, D. Fox, J. Davitz and M. Brenner, A survey of studies contrasting the quality of group performance and individual performance, 1920–1957, Psychol. Bull. 55(1958)337–372.

    Google Scholar 

  26. S. Makridakis and R.L. Winkler, Averages of forecasts: Some empirical results, Manag. Sci. 29(1983)987–996.

    Google Scholar 

  27. H. Markowitz,Portfolio Selection (Wiley, New York, 1959).

    Google Scholar 

  28. F.C. Miner, Jr., Group versus individual decision making: An investigation of performance measures, decision strategies, and process losses/gains, Organizational Behavior and Human Performance 33(1984)112–124.

    Google Scholar 

  29. J.F. Nash, Jr., The bargaining problem, Econometrica 13(1950)155–162.

    Google Scholar 

  30. J.C. Naylor, R.D. Pritchard and D.R. Ilgen,A Theory of Behavior in Organizations (Academic Press, New York, 1980).

    Google Scholar 

  31. J. Rawls,A Theory of Justice (Belknap Press of Harvard University Press, Cambridge, Mass., 1971).

    Google Scholar 

  32. H. Simon,The New Science of Management Decision (Harper, New York, 1960).

    Google Scholar 

  33. P. Slovic, Analyzing the expert judge: A descriptive study of a stockbroker's decision process, J. Appl. Psychol. 53(1969)255–263.

    Google Scholar 

  34. P. Slovic, Psychological study of human judgment: Implications for investment decision making, J. Finance 27(1972)779–799.

    Google Scholar 

  35. P. Slovic and S. Lichtenstein, Comparison of Bayesian and regression approaches to the study of information processing in judgment, Organizational Behavior and Human Performance 6(1971)649–744.

    Google Scholar 

  36. I.D. Steiner,Group Process and Productivity (Academic Press, New York, 1972).

    Google Scholar 

  37. J.B. Stroop, Is the judgment of the group better than that of the average member of the group? J. Exp. Psychol. 15(1932)550–562.

    Google Scholar 

  38. D.W. Taylor, P.C. Berry and C.H. Block, Does group participation when using brainstorming facilitate or inhibit creative thinking?, Admin. Sci. Quart. 3(1958)23–47.

    Google Scholar 

  39. A.H. van de Ven and A.L. Delbecq, The effectiveness of nominal, Delphi, and interacting group decision making processes, J. Academy of Management 17(1974)605–621.

    Google Scholar 

  40. J. von Neumann and O. Morgenstern,Theory of Games and Economic Behavior, 2nd ed. (Princeton University Press, Princeton, NJ, 1947).

    Google Scholar 

  41. W.F. Wright, Properties of judgment models in a financial setting, Organizational Behavior and Human Performance 23(1979)73–85.

    Google Scholar 

  42. P.W. Yetton and P.C. Bottger, Individual versus group problem solving: An empirical test of a best member strategy, Organizational Behavior and Human Performance 29(1982)307–321.

    Google Scholar 

  43. R.B. Zajonc, A note on group judgments and group size, Human Relations 15(1962)177–180.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Graduate School of Business, Columbia University, 10027, New York, NY, USA

    Noel Capon

  2. Department of Marketing, New York University, 40 West 4th Street, 10003, New York, NY, USA

    Joel H. Steckel

Authors
  1. Noel Capon
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Joel H. Steckel
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Capon, N., Steckel, J.H. Investing in the stock market: Statistical pooling of individual preference judgments. Ann Oper Res 23, 181–200 (1990). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02204845

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02204845

Keywords

Search

Navigation