Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Decision Making by Experts: The GNAHM Effect

  • Chapter
Decision Science and Technology

Abstract

Psychological studies involving experts date back to the earliest days of experimental psychology. Research on domain experts has also been a fundamental part of the history of judgment and decision making (JDM). The purpose of this chapter is to look at how domain experts have been viewed in the decision making literature. The focus will be on an unappreciated historical bias derived from a misinterpretation of the foundations of experimental psychology.

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

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 169.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 219.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 219.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  • Abdolmohammadi, M., & Wright, A. (1987). An examination of the effects of experience and task complexity on audit judgments. Accounting Review, 1–13.

    Google Scholar 

  • Anastasi, A. (1968). Psychological testing (3rd Ed.). NY: Macmillan Publishers Co.

    Google Scholar 

  • Anderson, N. H. (1987). A cognitive theory of judgment and decision. In, Brehmer, et al. (Eds.), SPUDM proceedings. Amsterdam: North-Holland Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Anderson, R. J. (1980). Wundt’s prominence and popularity in his later years. Psychological Research, 42, 87–101.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ashton, R. H. (1974). An experimental study of internal control judgments. Journal of Accounting Research, 12, 143–157.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ashton, R. H. (1983). Research in audit decision making: Rationale, evidence, and implications. Vancouver: Canadian Certified General Accountants’ Monograph 6.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bamber, E. M. (1983). Expert judgment in the audit team: A source reliability approach.. Journal of Accounting Research, 21, 396–412.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bamber, E. M., Tubbs, R. M., Gaeth, G., & Ramsey, R. J. (1991). Characteristics of audit experience in belief revision. In, USC audit judgment symposium. Los Angeles: University of Southern California.

    Google Scholar 

  • Benjamin, L. T., Jr. (1988). A history of psychology: Original sources and contemporary research. NY: McGraw Hill.

    Google Scholar 

  • Benner, P., Tanner, C.A., & Chesla, C. A. (1996). Expertise in nursing practice: Caring, clinical judgment, and ethics. NY: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Biddle, G. C., & Joyce, E. J. (1982). Heuristics and biases: Some implications for probabilistic inference in auditing. In, Symposium on audit research IV. Urbana: University of Illinois.

    Google Scholar 

  • Blumenthal, A. L. (1975). A reappraisal of Wilhelm Wundt. American Psychologist, 30, 1081–1086.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Blumenthal, A. L. (1979). The founding father we never knew. Contemporary Psychology, 24, 449–453.

    Google Scholar 

  • Blumenthal, A. L. (1980). Wilhelm Wundt and early American psychology: A clash of cultures. In R. W. Rieber (Ed.), Wilhelm Wundt and the making of a scientific psychology. NY: Plenum Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Boring, E. G. (1929). A history of experimental psychology. NY: Appleton & Co.

    Google Scholar 

  • Boring, E. G. (1950). A history of experimental psychology (2nd ed). NY: Appleton.

    Google Scholar 

  • Boring, M. D., & Boring, E. G. (1948). Masters and pupils among the American psychologists. American Journal of Psychology, 61, 527–534.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brunswik, E. (1955). Representative design and probabilistic theory in a functional psychology. Psychological Review, 62, 193–217.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Carroll, J. S., & Payne, J. W. (1976). The psychology of parole decision processes: A joint application of attribution theory and information-processing psychology. In J. S. Carroll & J. W. Payne (Eds.), Cognition and social psychology. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cattell, J. M. (1885). The inertia of the eye and the brain. Brain, 8, 295–312.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cattell, J. M. (1886). The time it takes to see and name objects. Mind, XI, 63–65.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cattell, J. M. (1887). Experiments on the association of ideas. Mind, XII, 68–74.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Christensen-Szalanski, J. J. J., & Beach, L. R. (1984). The citation bias: Fad and fashion in the judgment and decision making literature. American Psychologist, 75–78.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cohen, L. J. (1981). Can human irrationality be experimentally demonstrated? Behavior and Brain Sciences, 317–331.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cronbach, L. J. (1960). The two disciplines of scientific psychology. American Psychologist, 12, 671–684.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Danziger, K. (1980a). Wundt and the two traditions of psychology. In R. W. Rieber (Ed.), Wilhelm Wundt and the making of a scientific psychology. NY: Plenum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Danziger, K. (1980b). Wundt’s theory of behavior and volition. In R. W. Rieber (Ed.), Wilhelm Wundt and the making of a scientific psychology. NY: Plenum Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dawes, R. M. (1988). Rational choice in an uncertain world. San Diego, CA: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dawes, R. M., & Corrigan, B. (1974). Linear models in decision making. Psychological Bulletin, 81, 95–106.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ebbesen, E., & Konecni, V. (1975). Decision making and information integration in the courts: The setting of bail. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 32, 805–821.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Edwards, W. (1983). Human cognitive capacities, representativeness, and ground rules for research. In P. Humphreys, O. Svenson, & A. Vari (Eds.), Analyzing and aiding decision processes. Budapest: Akademiai Kiado.

    Google Scholar 

  • Edwards, W., & von Winterfeldt, D. (1986). On cognitive illusions and their implications. Southern California Law Review, 59(2), 401–451.

    Google Scholar 

  • Einhorn, H. (1974). Expert judgment: Some necessary conditions and an example. Journal of Applied Psychology, 59, 562–571.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ettenson, R., Shanteau, J., & Krogstad, J. (1987). Expert judgment: Is more information better? Psychological Reports, 60, 227–238.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fancher, R. E. (1979). Pioneers of psychology. NY: Norton.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gardner, H. (1985). The mind’s new science: A history of the cognitive revolution. NY: Basic Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gibbins, M. (1977). Human inference, heuristics, and auditors’ judgment processes. In, CICA Auditing Research Symposium. Toronto: CICA.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gigerenzer, G. (1993). The superego, the ego, and the id in statistical reasoning. In G. Keren & C. Lewis (Eds.), A handbook for data analysis in the behavioral sciences: Methodological issues. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gigerenzer, G., & Goldstein, D. G. (1996). Reasoning the fast and frugal way: Models of bounded rationality. Psychological Review, 103, 650–669.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gigerenzer, G., & Hoffrage, U. (1995). How to improve Bayesian reasoning without instruction: Frequency formats. Psychological Review, 102, 684–704.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gillis, J., & Schneider, C. (1966). The historical preconditions of representative design. In K. R. Hammond (Ed.), The psychology of Egon Brunswik. NY: Holt.

    Google Scholar 

  • Goldberg., L. R. (1959). The effectiveness of clinician’s judgments: The diagnosis of organic brain damage from the Bender-Gestalt Test. Journal of Consulting Psychology, 23, 25–33.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Goldberg, L. R. (1968). Simple models or simples processes? Some research on clinical judgments. American Psychologist, 236(7), 483–496.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Goldberg, L. R. (1969). The search for configurai relationships in personality assessment: The diagnosis of psychosis vs. neurosis from the MMPI. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 4, 523–536.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Goldberg, L. R. (1970). Man vs. model of man: A rationale, plus some evidence, for a method of improving clinical inferences. Psychological Bulletin, 73, 422–432.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Goldberg, L. R., & Werts, C. E. (1966). The reliability of clinicians’ judgments: A multitrait-multimethod approach. Journal of Consulting Psychology, 30,199–206.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hammond, K. R. (1955). Probabilistic functioning and the clinical method. Psychological Review, 62, 255–262.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hebb, D. O. (1972). Textbook of psychology (3rd Ed.). Philadelphia: W. B. Saunders.

    Google Scholar 

  • Heidbreder,. E. (1933). Seven psychologies. NY: Appleton-Century Co.

    Google Scholar 

  • Helmstadter, G. C. (1964). Principles of psychological measurement. NY: Appleton.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hoffman, P. J. (1960). The paramorphic representation of clinical judgment. Psychological Bulletin, 62, 255–262.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hoffman, P., Slovic, P., & Rorer, L. (1968). An analysis of variance model for the assessment of configurai cue utilization in clinical judgment. Psychological Bulletin, 69, 338–349.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Holt, D. L. (1987). Auditors and base rates revisited. Accounting, Organizations, and Society, 12, 571–578.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hothersall, D. (1984). History of psychology. Philadelphia: Temple University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hughes, H. D. (1917). An interesting corn seed experiment. Iowa Agriculturalist, 17, 424–425.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jacavone, J., & Dostal, M. (1992). A descriptive study of nursing judgment in assessment and management of cardiac pain. Advances in Nursing Science, 15, 54–63.

    Google Scholar 

  • Joyce, E. J. (1976). Expert judgment in audit program planning. Journal of Accounting Research, 14, 29–60.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Joyce, E. J., & Biddle, G. C. (1981). Are auditors’ judgments sufficiently regressive? Journal of Accounting Research, 19, 329–349.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jungermann, H. (1983). The two camps of rationality. In R. W. Scholz (Ed.), Decision making under uncertainty. Amsterdam: Elsevier.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kahneman, D. (1991). Judgment and decision making: A personal view. Psychological Science, 2, 142–145.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kahneman, D., & Tversky, A. (1972). Subjective probability: A judgment of representativeness. Cognitive Psychology, 3, 430–454.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kelly, E. L. (1967). Assessment of human characteristics. Belmont, CA: Brooks/Cole.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kendler, H. H. (1987). Historical foundations of modern psychology. Philadelphia: Temple University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kida, T. (1980). An investigation into auditors’ continuity and related qualification judgments. Journal of Accounting Research, 8, 506–523.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kida, T. (1984). The effect of causality and specificity on data use. Journal of Accounting Research, 22, 145–152.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kinney, W. R., & Uecker, W. (1982). Mitigating the consequences of anchoring in auditor judgments. The Accounting Review, 57, 55–69.

    Google Scholar 

  • Krogstad, J. L., Ettenson, R. T., & Shanteau, J. (1984). Context and experience in auditors’ materiality judgments. Auditing: A Journal of Practice & Theory, 4, 54–113.

    Google Scholar 

  • Leahey, T. H. (1987). A history of psychology: Main currents in psychological thought (2nd ed).Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.

    Google Scholar 

  • Libby, R., Artman, J. T., & Willingham, J. J. (1985). Process susceptibility, control risk, and audit planning. The Accounting Review, 60, 212–230.

    Google Scholar 

  • Maloney, M. P., & Ward, M. P. (1976). Psychological assessment: A conceptual approach. NY: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Meehl, P. (1954). Clinical versus statistical prediction: A theoretical analysis and a review of the evidence. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Messier, W. F. (1983). The effect of experience and firm type on materiality/disclosure judgments. Journal of Accounting Research, 21, 611–618.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Miller, G. A. (1962). Psychology: The science of mental life. NY: Harper & Row.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mischel, T. (1970). Wundt and the conceptual foundations of psychology. Philosophical and Phenomenological Research, 31, 1–26.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mosier, K. L. (1997). Myths of expert decision making and automated decision aids. In C. Zsambok & G. Klein (Eds.), Naturalistic decision making. NJ: Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Murphy, G. (1929). An historical introduction to modern psychology. NY: Harcourt, Brace & Co.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Oskamp, S. (1962). The relationship of clinical experience and training methods to several criteria of clinical prediction. Psychological Monograph, 76.

    Google Scholar 

  • Oskamp, S. (1965). Overconfidence in case-study judgments. Journal of Consulting Psychology, 29, 261–265.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Oskamp, S. (1967). Clinical judgment from the MMPI: Simple or complex? Journal of Clinical Psychology, 23, 411–415.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Phelps, R. H. (1977). Expert livestock judgment: A descriptive analysis of the development of expertise. Unpublished dissertation. Manhattan: Kansas State Univ.

    Google Scholar 

  • Phelps, R. H., & Shanteau, J. (1978). Livestock judges: How much information can an expert use? Organizational Behavior and Human Performance, 21, 209–219.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Reilly, B. A., & Doherty, M. E. (1989). A note on the assessment of self-insight in judgment research. Organizational Behavior & Human Performance, 21, 209–219.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rieber, R. W. (1980). Wilhelm Wundt and the making of a scientific psychology. NY: Plenum.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Samelson, F. (1974). History, origin myth and ideology: “Discovery” of social psychology. Journal for the Theory of Social Behavior, 4, 217–231.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sargent, S. S., & Stafford, K. R. (1965). Basic teachings of the great psychologists (Rev Ed.). Garden City, NY: Dolphin Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schwartz, S. & Griffin, T. (1986). Medical thinking: The psychology of medical judgment and decision making. NY: Springer-Verlag.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schultz, D. P. (1969). A history of modern psychology. San Diego: Harcourt.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schultz, D. P., & Schultz, S. E. (1987). A history of modern psychology (4th ed). San Diego: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shanteau, J. (1977). Correlation as a deceiving measure of fit. Bulletin of the Psychonomic Society, 10, 134–136.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shanteau, J. (1978). When does a response error become a judgmental bias? Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Learning and Memory, 4, 579–581.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shanteau, J. (1989). Cognitive heuristics and biases in behavioral auditing: Review, comments, and observations. Accounting, Organizations, and Society, 14, 165–177.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shanteau, J. (1992a). Competence in experts: The role of task characteristics. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 53, 252–266.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shanteau, J. (1992b). How much information does an expert use? Is it relevant? Acta Psycholgica, 81, 75–86.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shanteau, J., & Stewart, T. R. (1992). Why study expert decision making? Some historical perspectives and comments. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 53, 95–106.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Slovic, P. (1969). Analyzing the expert judge: A descriptive study of a stockbroker’s decision processes. Journal of Applied Psychology, 53, 255–263.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Slovic, P., & Monahan, J. (1995). Probability, danger, and coercion: A study of risk perception and decision making in mental health law. Law and Human Behavior, 19, 49–65.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Smith, J. F., & Kida, T. (1991). Heuristics and biases: Expertise and task realism in auditing. Psychological Bulletin, 109, 472–489.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sokal, M. M. (1981). An education in psychology: James McKeen Cattell’s journal and letters from Germany and England, 1880–1888. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stewart, T.R., Roebber, P. J., & Bosart, L. F. (1997). The importance of the task in analyzing expert judgment. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 69, 205–219.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Titchener, E. B. (1908). The psychology of feeling and attention. NY: Macmillan.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Titchener, E. B. (1910). A textbook of psychology. NY: Macmillan.

    Google Scholar 

  • Titchener, E. B. (1916). A beginner’s psychology. NY: Macmillan.

    Google Scholar 

  • Titchener, E. B. (1921). Wilhelm Wundt. Am. Journal of Psychology, 32, 161–178.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Titchener, E. B. (1923). An outline of psychology. NY: Macmillan.

    Google Scholar 

  • Trumbo, D., Adams, C., Milner, M., & Schipper, L. (1962). Reliability and accuracy in the inspection of hard red winter wheat. Cereal Science Today, 7, 62–71.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tversky, A., & Kahneman, D. (1974). Judgment under uncertainty: Heuristics and biases. Science, 185, 1124–1131.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wallace, H. A. (1923). What is in the corn judge’s mind? Journal of the American Society of Agronomy, 15, 300–324.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Waller, W. S., & Felix, W. L., Jr. (1987). Auditors’ covariation judgment. The Accounting Review, 62, 275–292.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wallsten, T. S. (1983). The theoretical status of judgmental heuristics. In R. W. Scholz (Ed.), Decision making under uncertainty. Amsterdam: North-Holland.

    Google Scholar 

  • Watson, R. I. (1968). The great psychologists: From Aristotle to Freud (2nd Ed.). Philadelphia: J. B. Lippincott Co.

    Google Scholar 

  • Watson, R. I. (1979). Bask writings in the history of psychology. NY: Oxford.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wright, G. (1984). Behavioral decision theory: An introduction. Beverly Hills: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wundt, W. (1873). Grundzüge der physiologischen psychologie. Leipzig: Engelmann.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wundt, W. (1892). Vorlesungen über die menschen und theirseele. (Trans. Creighton & Titchener). Lectures on human and animal psychology. NY: Macmillan.)

    Google Scholar 

  • Wundt, W. (1904). Principles of physiological psychology (4th ed) (trans. Titchener). NY: Macmillan.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Kansas State University, USA

    James Shanteau

Authors
  1. James Shanteau
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Kansas State University, USA

    James Shanteau

  2. Ohio State University, USA

    Barbara A. Mellers

  3. George Mason University, USA

    David A. Schum

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 1999 Springer Science+Business Media New York

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Shanteau, J. (1999). Decision Making by Experts: The GNAHM Effect. In: Shanteau, J., Mellers, B.A., Schum, D.A. (eds) Decision Science and Technology. Springer, Boston, MA. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4615-5089-1_7

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4615-5089-1_7

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Boston, MA

  • Print ISBN: 978-1-4613-7315-5

  • Online ISBN: 978-1-4615-5089-1

  • eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation