Hostname: page-component-cb9f654ff-mx8w7 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-09-06T06:16:00.927Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

MODELLING INDIVIDUAL EXPERTISE IN GROUP JUDGEMENTS

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  19 February 2015

Dominik Klein  and
Jan Sprenger
Dominik Klein
Affiliation:
Tilburg Center for Logic, General Ethics and Philosophy of Science (TiLPS), Tilburg University, P.O. Box 90153, 5000 LE Tilburg, the Netherlands. Email: d.klein@uvt.nl.
Jan Sprenger
Affiliation:
Tilburg Center for Logic, General Ethics and Philosophy of Science (TiLPS), Tilburg University, P.O. Box 90153, 5000 LE Tilburg, the Netherlands. Email: j.sprenger@uvt.nl. URL: http://www.laeuferpaar.de.
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract:

Group judgements are often – implicitly or explicitly – influenced by their members’ individual expertise. However, given that expertise is seldom recognized fully and that some distortions may occur (bias, correlation, etc.), it is not clear that differential weighting is an epistemically advantageous strategy with respect to straight averaging. Our paper characterizes a wide set of conditions under which differential weighting outperforms straight averaging and embeds the results into the multidisciplinary group decision-making literature.

Keywords

group decision-makingexpertisejudgement aggregationstatistical estimationsocial psychology

Information

Type
Symposium on Individual and Social Deliberation
Information
Economics & Philosophy , Volume 31 , Issue 1 , March 2015 , pp. 3 - 25
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

REFERENCES

Armstrong, J. S. 2001. Combining forecasts. In Principles of Forecasting: A Handbook For Researchers and Practitioners, ed. Armstrong, J. Scott. Norwell, MA: Kluwer Academic.Google Scholar
Bates, J. M. and Granger, C. W. J.. 1969. The combination of forecasts. Operational Research Quarterly 20: 451–468.Google Scholar
Baumann, M. R. and Bonner, B. L.. 2004. The effects of variability and expectations on utilization of member expertise and group performance. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes 93: 89–101.Google Scholar
Bonner, B. L. 2000. The effects of extroversion on influence in ambiguous group tasks. Small Group Research 31: 225–244.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bonner, B. L. 2004. Expertise in Group Problem Solving: Recognition, Social Combination, and Performance. Group Dynamics: Theory, Research, and Practice 8: 277–290.Google Scholar
Bonner, B. L., Baumann, M. R. and Dalal, R. S.. 2002. The effects of member expertise on group decision-making and performance. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes 88: 719–736.Google Scholar
Clemen, R. T. 1989. Combining forecasts: a review and annotated bibliography. International Journal of Forecasting 5: 559–583.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cooke, R. M. 1991. Experts in Uncertainty. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Davis, J. H. 1973. Group decision and social interaction: A theory of social decision schemes. Psychological Review 80: 97–125.Google Scholar
DeGroot, M. 1974. Reaching a consensus. Journal of the American Statistical Association 69: 118–121.Google Scholar
Einhorn, H. J., Hogarth, R. M. and Klempner, E.. 1977. Quality of Group Judgment. Psychological Bulletin 84: 158–172.Google Scholar
Elga, A. 2007. Reflection and Disagreement. Noûs 41: 478–502.Google Scholar
Gigerenzer, G. and Goldstein, D. G.. 1996. Reasoning the fast and frugal way: models of bounded rationality. Psychological Review 103: 650–669.Google Scholar
Hartmann, S. and Sprenger, J.. 2010. The weight of competence under a realistic loss function. The Logic Journal of the IGPL 18: 346–352.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Henry, R. A. 1995. Improving group judgment accuracy: information sharing and determining the best member. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes 62: 190–197.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hill, G. W. 1982. Group versus individual performance: Are N + 1 heads better than one? Psychological Bulletin 91: 517–539.Google Scholar
Hinsz, V. B. 1999. Group decision making with responses of a quantitative nature: the theory of social decision schemes for quantities. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes 80: 28–49.Google Scholar
Hogarth, R. M. 1978. A note on aggregating opinions. Organizational Behavior and Human Performance 21: 40–46.Google Scholar
Larrick, R. P., Burson, K. A. and Soll, J. B.. 2007. Social comparison and overconfidence: when thinking you’re better than average predicts overconfidence (and when it does not). Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes 102: 76–94.Google Scholar
Laughlin, P. R. and Ellis, A. L.. 1986. Demonstrability and social combination processes on mathematical intellective tasks. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology 22: 177–189.Google Scholar
Lehrer, K. and Wagner, C.. 1981. Rational Consensus in Science and Society: A Philosophical and Mathematical Study, Vol. 21. Berlin: Springer.Google Scholar
Libby, R., Trotman, K. T. and Zimmer, I.. 1987. Member variation, recognition of expertise and group performance. Journal of Applied Psychology 72: 81–87.Google Scholar
Lindley, D. V. 1983. Reconciliation of probability distributions. Operations Research 31: 866–880.Google Scholar
Littlepage, G. E., Schmidt, G. W., Whisler, E. W. and Frost, A. G.. 1995. An input-process-output analysis of influence and performance in problemsolving groups. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 69: 877–889.Google Scholar
List, C. 2012. The theory of judgment aggregation: an introductory review. Synthese 187: 179–207.Google Scholar
Martini, C., Sprenger, J. and Colyvan, M.. 2013. Resolving disagreement through mutual respect. Erkenntnis 78: 881–898.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nadeau, R., Cloutier, E. and Guay, J.-H.. 1993. New evidence about the existence of a bandwagon effect in the opinion formation process. International Political Science Review 14: 203–213.Google Scholar
Page, S. E. 2007. The Difference: How the Power of Diversity Creates Better Groups, Firms, Schools, and Societies. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Soll, J. B. and Larrick, R. P.. 2009. Strategies for revising judgment: how (and how well) people use others’ opinions. Journal of Experimental Psychology 35: 780–805.Google Scholar
Surowiecki, J. 2004. The Wisdom of the Crowds. Harpswell, ME: Anchor.Google Scholar
Thomas, E. J. and Fink, C. F.. 1961. Models of group problem solving. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology 63: 53–63.Google Scholar
Wilf, H. S. 1985. Some examples of combinatorial averaging. American Mathematical Monthly 92: 250–261.Google Scholar