Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Overconfidence in Judgmental Forecasting

  • Chapter
Principles of Forecasting

Part of the book series: International Series in Operations Research & Management Science ((ISOR,volume 30))

Abstract

Overconfidence is a common finding in the forecasting research literature. Judgmental overconfidence leads people (1) to neglect decision aids, (2) to make predictions contrary to the base rate, and (3) to succumb to “groupthink.” To counteract overconfidence forecasters should heed six principles: (1) Consider alternatives, especially in new situations; (2) List reasons why the forecast might be wrong; (3) In group interaction, appoint a devil’s advocate; (4) Make an explicit prediction and then obtain feedback; (5) Treat the feedback you receive as valuable information; (6) When possible, conduct experiments to test prediction strategies. These principles can help people to avoid generating only reasons that bolster their predictions and to learn optimally by comparing a documented prediction with outcome feedback.

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 429.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 549.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 549.99
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

  • Abelson, R. P. (1963), “Computer simulation of `hot’ cognition,” in S. S. Tomkins S. Messick (eds.), Computer Simulation of Personality. New York: Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Arkes, H. R. (1981), “Impediments to accurate clinical judgment and possible ways to minimize their impact,” Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 49, 323–330.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Arkes, H. R., C. Christensen, C. Lai C. Blumer (1987), “Two methods of reducing overconfidence,” Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 39, 133–144.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Arkes, H. R., R. M. Dawes C. Christensen (1986), “Factors influencing the use of a decision rule in a probabilistic task,” Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 37, 93–110.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Babad, E., M. Hills M. O’Driscoll (1992), “Factors influencing wishful thinking and predictions of election outcomes,” Basic and Applied Social Psychology, 13, 461–476.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bazerman, M. H. M. A. Neale (1982), “Improving negotiation effectiveness under final offer arbitration: The role of selection and training,” Journal of Applied Psychology, 67, 543–548.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Boatsman, J. R., C. Moeckel B. K. Pei (1997), “The effects of decision consequences on auditors’ reliance on decision aids in audit planning,” Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 71, 211–248.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Boje, D. M. J. K. Murnighan (1982), “Group confidence pressures in iterative decisions,” Management Science, 28, 1187–1196.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brake, G. L., M. E. Doherty G. D. Kleiter (1996), “Overconfidence: Rethinking a fundamental bias in judgment yet again,” Presented at the annual meeting of the Judgment/Decision Making Society, Chicago, IL, November, 1996. (Copies may be obtained from the senior author at the Department of Psychology, University of Illinois, 603 Daniel Street, Room 234, Champaign, IL, 61820.)

    Google Scholar 

  • Braun, P. A. I. Yaniv (1992), “A case study of expert judgment: Economists’ probabilities vs. base-rate model forecasts,” Journal of Behavioral Decision Making, 5, 217–231.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brenner, L. A., D. J. Koehler, V. Liberman A. Tversky (1996), “Overconfidence in probability and frequency judgments,” Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 65, 212–219.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bruner, J. M. C. Potter (1964), “Interference in visual recognition,” Science, 144, 424425.

    Google Scholar 

  • Budescu, D. V., T. S. Wallsten W. T. Au (1997), “On the importance of random error in the study of probability judgment: Part II: Applying the stochastic judgment model to detect systematic trends,” Journal of Behavioral Decision Making, 10, 173–188.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Buehler, R., D. W. Griffin M. Ross (1994), “Exploring the planning fallacy: Why people underestimate their task completion times,” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 67, 366–381.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Carlson, B. (1993), “The accuracy of future forecasts and past judgments,” Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 54, 245–276.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Christensen-Szalanski, J. J. J. J. B. Bushyhead (1981), “Physicians’ use of probabilistic information in a real clinical setting,” Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 7, 928–935.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Davis, D. (1985), “New projects: Beware of false economies,” Harvard Business Review, (March-April), 95–101.

    Google Scholar 

  • Davis, F. D., G. L. Lohse J. E. Kotteman (1994), “Harmful effects of seemingly helpful information on forecasts of stock earnings,” Journal of Economic Psychology, 15, 253–267.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dawson, N. V., A. F. Connors Jr., T. Speroff, A. Kemka, P. Shaw H. R. Arkes (1993), “Hemodynamic assessment in the critically ill: Is physician confidence warranted?” Medical Decision Making, 13, 258–266.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • DeVaul, R. A., F. Jervey, J. A. Chappell, P. Carver, B. Short S. O’Keefe (1957), “Medical school performance of initially rejected students,” Journal of the American Medical Association, 257, 47–51.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Druckman, D. R. A. Bjork (1994), Learning, Remembering, Believing: Enhancing Human Performance. Washington D.C.: National Research Council.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dunning, D., D. W. Griffin, J. D. Milojkovic L. Ross (1990), “The overconfidence effect in social prediction,” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 58, 568–581.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Einhorn, H. J. R. M. Hogarth (1978), “Confidence in judgment: Persistence in the illusion of validity,” Psychological Review, 85, 395–416.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Erev, I., T. S. Wallsten D. V. Budescu (1994), “Simultaneous over-and underconfidence: The role of error in judgment processes,” Psychological Review, 101, 519–527.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Esser, J. K. J. S. Lindoerfer (1989), “Groupthink and the space shuttle Challenger accident: Toward a quantitative case analysis,” Journal of Behavioral Decision Making, 2, 167–177.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fischhoff, B. (1975), “Hindsight foresight: The effect of outcome knowledge on judgment under uncertainty,” Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 1, 288–299.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fischhoff, B. D. MacGregor (1982), “Subjective confidence in forecasts,” Journal of Forecasting, 1, 155–172.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gigerenzer, G., U. Hoffrage H. Kleinbolting (1991), “Probabilistic mental models: A Brunswikian theory of confidence,” Psychological Review, 98, 506–528.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gregory, W. L., R. B. Cialdini K. M. Carpenter (1982), “Self-relevant scenarios as mediators of likelihood estimates and compliance: Does imagining make it so?” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 43, 89–99.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Griffin, D. W., D. Dunning L. Ross (1990), “The role of construal processes in overconfident predictions about the self and others,” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 59, 1128–1139.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Harvey, N. (1990), “Effects of difficulty on judgemental probability forecasting of control response efficacy,” Journal of Forecasting, 9, 373–387.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Heath, C. R. Gonzalez (1995), “Interaction with others increases decision confidence but not decision quality: Evidence against information collection views of interactive decision making,” Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 61, 305–326.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hirt, E. R. K. D. Markman (1995), “Multiple explanation: A consider-an-alternative strategy for debiasing judgments,” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 69, 1069–1086.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hoch, S. J. (1985), “Counterfactual reasoning and accuracy in predicting personal events,” Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 11, 719–731.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hoch, S. J. G. F. Loewenstein (1989), “Outcome feedback: Hindsight and information,” Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 15, 605–619.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jackson, M. W. (1988), “Lay and professional perceptions of dangerousness and other forensic issues,” Canadian Journal of Criminology, 30, 215–229.

    Google Scholar 

  • Janis, I. L. (1972), Victims of Groupthink. Boston: Houghton Mifflin.

    Google Scholar 

  • Juslin, P. (1994), “The overconfidence phenomenon as a consequence of informal experimenter-guided selection of almanac questions,” Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 57, 226–246.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kahneman, D. A. Tversky (1982), “The simulation heuristic,” in D. Kahneman, P. Slovic A. Tversky (eds.), Judgment Under Uncertainty: Heuristics and Biases. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Keren, G. (1987), “Facing uncertainty in the game of bridge: A calibration study,” Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 39, 98–114.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Koehler, D. J. (1991), “Explanation, imagination, and confidence in judgment,” Psychological Bulletin, 110, 499–519.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Koriat, A., S. Lichtenstein B. Fischhoff (1980), “Reasons for confidence,” Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Learning and Memory, 6, 107–118.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lawrence, M. J. S. Makridakis (1989), “Factors affecting judgmental forecasts and confidence intervals,” Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 43, 172–187.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lichtenstein, S., B. Fischhoff L. D. Phillips (1982), “Calibration of probabilities: The state of the art to 1980,” in D. Kahneman, P. Slovic A. Tversky, (eds.), Judgment Under Uncertainty: Heuristics and Biases. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lusk, C. M. K. R. Hammond (1991), “Judgment in a dynamic task: Microburst forecasting,” Journal of Behavioral Decision Making, 4, 55–73.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Murphy, A. H. R. L. Winkler (1984), “Probability forecasting in meteorology,” Journal of the American Statistical Association, 79, 489–500.

    Google Scholar 

  • Neale, M. A. M. H. Bazerman (1985), “Perspectives for understanding negotiation: Viewing negotiation as a judgmental process,” Journal of Conflict Resolution, 29, 33–55.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • O’Connor, M. M. Lawrence (1989), “An examination of the accuracy of judgemental confidence intervals in time series forecasting,” Journal of Forecasting, 8, 141–155.

    Article  Google Scholar 

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

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Paese, P. W. J. Sniezek (1991), “Influences on the appropriateness of confidence in judgment: Practice, effort, information, and decision-making,” Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 48, 100–130.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pfeifer, P. E. (1994), “Are we overconfident in the belief that probability forecasters are overconfident?” Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 58, 203–213.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Phillips, L. D. (1987), “On the adequacy of judgmental forecasts,” in G. Wright P. Ay-ton (eds.), Judgmental Forecasting. Chichester, UK: Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Plous, S. (1995), “A comparison of strategies for reducing interval overconfidence in group judgments,” Journal of Applied Psychology, 80, 443–454.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ronis, D. L. J. F. Yates (1987), “Components of probability judgment accuracy: Individual consistency and effects of subject matter and assessment method,” Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 40, 193–218.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ross, J. B. M. Staw (1986), “Expo 86: An escalation prototype,” Administrative Science Quarterly, 31, 274–297.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schweiger, D. M., W. R. Sandberg J. W. Ragan (1986), “Group approaches for improving strategic decision making: A comparative analysis of dialectical inquiry, devil’s advocacy, and consensus,” Academy of Management Journal, 29, 51–72.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schwenk, C. R. R. A. Cosier (1980), “Effects of the expert, devil’s advocate, and dialectical inquiry methods on prediction performance,” Organizational Behavior and Human Performance, 26, 409–423.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sherman, S. J., K. S. Zehner, J. Johnson E. R. Hirt (1983), “Social explanation: The role of timing, set and recall on subjective likelihood estimates,” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 44, 1127–1143.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Slovic, P. B. Fischhoff (1977), “On the psychology of experimental surprises,” Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 3, 544–551.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sniezek, J. A. (1989), “An examination of group processes in judgmental forecasting,” International Journal of Forecasting, 5, 171–178.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sniezek, J. A. (1992), “Groups under uncertainty: An examination of confidence in group decision making,” Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 52, 124–155.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sniezek, J. R. A. Henry (1989), “Accuracy and confidence in group judgment,” Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 43, 1–28.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tetlock, P. E. (1994), “Good judgment in world politics: Who gets what right, when, and why?” Presented at annual meeting of the American Psychological Society, Washington, D.C., July, 1994. (Copies may be obtained from the author at Department of Political Science, Ohio State University, 2140 Derby Hall, 154 N. Oval Mall, Columbus, OH, 43210.)

    Google Scholar 

  • Tetlock, P. E. (1999) “Theory-driven reasoning about possible pasts and probable futures: Are we prisoners of our preconceptions,” American Journal of Political Science, 43, 335–366.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Trafimow, D. J. Sniezek (1994), “Perceived expertise and its effect on confidence,” Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 57, 290–302.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tversky, A. D. Kahneman (1973), “Availability: A heuristic for judging frequency and probability,” Cognitive Psychology, 5, 207–232.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vallone, R. P., D. W. Griffin, S. Lin L. Ross (1990), “Overconfident prediction of future actions and outcomes by self and others,” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 58, 582–592.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wagenaar, W. A. G. B. Keren (1986), “Does the expert know? The reliability of predictions and confidence ratings of experts,” in E. Hollnagel, G. Mancini D. D. Woods, (eds.), Intelligent Decision Support in Process Environments. Berlin: Springer-Verlag.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wason, P. C. (1960), “On the failure to eliminate hypotheses in a conceptual task,” Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 12, 129–140.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Werner, P. D., T. L. Rose J. A. Yesavage (1983), “Reliability, accuracy, and decision-making strategy in clinical predictions of imminent dangerousness,” Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 51, 815–825.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Whitecotton, S. M. S. A. Butler (1998), “Influencing decision aid reliance through involvement in the information selection process,” Behavioral Research in Accounting, 10, 182–200.

    Google Scholar 

  • Whitecotton, S. M., D. E. Sanders K. B. Norris (1998), “Improving prediction accuracy with a combination of human intuition and mechanical decision aids,” Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 76, 325–348.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Winman, A. P. Juslin (1993), “Calibration of sensory and cognitive judgments: Two different accounts,” Scandinavian Journal of Psychology, 34, 135–148.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yates, J. F., Y. Zhu, D. L. Ronis D. F. Wang (1989), “Probability judgment accuracy: China, Japan, and the United States,” Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 43, 145–171.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Psychology, Ohio State University, USA

    Hal R. Arkes

Authors
  1. Hal R. Arkes
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. The Wharton School, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, USA

    J. Scott Armstrong

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2001 Springer Science+Business Media New York

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Arkes, H.R. (2001). Overconfidence in Judgmental Forecasting. In: Armstrong, J.S. (eds) Principles of Forecasting. International Series in Operations Research & Management Science, vol 30. Springer, Boston, MA. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-0-306-47630-3_22

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-0-306-47630-3_22

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Boston, MA

  • Print ISBN: 978-0-7923-7401-5

  • Online ISBN: 978-0-306-47630-3

  • eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation