“可能”的金额是多少?代表性(模态)值被认为是可能的,即使它们的概率很低

IF 3.4 2区 管理学 Q2 MANAGEMENT Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes Pub Date : 2022-07-01 DOI:10.1016/j.obhdp.2022.104166
Karl Halvor Teigen , Marie Juanchich , Erik Løhre
{"title":"“可能”的金额是多少?代表性(模态)值被认为是可能的,即使它们的概率很低","authors":"Karl Halvor Teigen ,&nbsp;Marie Juanchich ,&nbsp;Erik Løhre","doi":"10.1016/j.obhdp.2022.104166","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>Research on verbal probabilities and standard scales issued by national and international authorities suggest that only events with probabilities above 60% should be labelled “likely”. We find, however, that when people apply this term to continuous variables, like expected costs, it describes the <em>most</em> likely (modal) outcome or interval, regardless of actual probabilities, which may be quite small. This was demonstrated in six studies in which lay participants (<em>N</em> = 2,228) were shown probability distributions from various domains and asked to generate or to select “likely” outcome intervals. Despite having numeric and graphically displayed information available, participants judged central, low-probability segments as “likely” (as opposed to equal or larger segments in the tails) and subsequently overestimated the chances of these outcomes. We conclude that high-probability interpretations of “likely” are only valid for binary outcomes but not for distributions of graded variables or multiple outcomes.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":48442,"journal":{"name":"Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes","volume":"171 ","pages":"Article 104166"},"PeriodicalIF":3.4000,"publicationDate":"2022-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0749597822000504/pdfft?md5=c6c962c48f30b26a69c39b55f4ae1955&pid=1-s2.0-S0749597822000504-main.pdf","citationCount":"4","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"What is a “likely” amount? Representative (modal) values are considered likely even when their probabilities are low\",\"authors\":\"Karl Halvor Teigen ,&nbsp;Marie Juanchich ,&nbsp;Erik Løhre\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.obhdp.2022.104166\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><p>Research on verbal probabilities and standard scales issued by national and international authorities suggest that only events with probabilities above 60% should be labelled “likely”. We find, however, that when people apply this term to continuous variables, like expected costs, it describes the <em>most</em> likely (modal) outcome or interval, regardless of actual probabilities, which may be quite small. This was demonstrated in six studies in which lay participants (<em>N</em> = 2,228) were shown probability distributions from various domains and asked to generate or to select “likely” outcome intervals. Despite having numeric and graphically displayed information available, participants judged central, low-probability segments as “likely” (as opposed to equal or larger segments in the tails) and subsequently overestimated the chances of these outcomes. We conclude that high-probability interpretations of “likely” are only valid for binary outcomes but not for distributions of graded variables or multiple outcomes.</p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":48442,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes\",\"volume\":\"171 \",\"pages\":\"Article 104166\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-07-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0749597822000504/pdfft?md5=c6c962c48f30b26a69c39b55f4ae1955&pid=1-s2.0-S0749597822000504-main.pdf\",\"citationCount\":\"4\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"91\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0749597822000504\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"管理学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"MANAGEMENT\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes","FirstCategoryId":"91","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0749597822000504","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"MANAGEMENT","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 4

摘要

国家和国际权威机构发布的关于口头概率和标准尺度的研究表明,只有概率超过60%的事件才应被标记为“可能”。然而,我们发现,当人们将这个术语应用于连续变量时,比如预期成本,它描述了最可能的(模态)结果或区间,而不管实际概率,这可能是相当小的。这在六项研究中得到了证明,这些研究向非专业参与者(N = 2228)展示了来自不同领域的概率分布,并要求他们生成或选择“可能”的结果区间。尽管有数字和图形显示的信息可用,参与者判断中心,低概率的部分是“可能的”(而不是相等或更大的部分在尾部),随后高估了这些结果的机会。我们的结论是,“可能”的高概率解释只适用于二元结果,而不适用于分级变量或多重结果的分布。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
What is a “likely” amount? Representative (modal) values are considered likely even when their probabilities are low

Research on verbal probabilities and standard scales issued by national and international authorities suggest that only events with probabilities above 60% should be labelled “likely”. We find, however, that when people apply this term to continuous variables, like expected costs, it describes the most likely (modal) outcome or interval, regardless of actual probabilities, which may be quite small. This was demonstrated in six studies in which lay participants (N = 2,228) were shown probability distributions from various domains and asked to generate or to select “likely” outcome intervals. Despite having numeric and graphically displayed information available, participants judged central, low-probability segments as “likely” (as opposed to equal or larger segments in the tails) and subsequently overestimated the chances of these outcomes. We conclude that high-probability interpretations of “likely” are only valid for binary outcomes but not for distributions of graded variables or multiple outcomes.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
8.90
自引率
4.30%
发文量
68
期刊介绍: Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes publishes fundamental research in organizational behavior, organizational psychology, and human cognition, judgment, and decision-making. The journal features articles that present original empirical research, theory development, meta-analysis, and methodological advancements relevant to the substantive domains served by the journal. Topics covered by the journal include perception, cognition, judgment, attitudes, emotion, well-being, motivation, choice, and performance. We are interested in articles that investigate these topics as they pertain to individuals, dyads, groups, and other social collectives. For each topic, we place a premium on articles that make fundamental and substantial contributions to understanding psychological processes relevant to human attitudes, cognitions, and behavior in organizations. In order to be considered for publication in OBHDP a manuscript has to include the following: 1.Demonstrate an interesting behavioral/psychological phenomenon 2.Make a significant theoretical and empirical contribution to the existing literature 3.Identify and test the underlying psychological mechanism for the newly discovered behavioral/psychological phenomenon 4.Have practical implications in organizational context
期刊最新文献
Joining disconnected others reduces social identity threat in women brokers Retraction notice to “Don’t stop believing: Rituals improve performance by decreasing anxiety” [Organ. Behav. Hum. Decis. Process. 137C (2016) 71–85] The confrontation effect: When users engage more with ideology-inconsistent content online A Numeracy-Task interaction model of perceived differences On time or on thin ice: How deadline violations negatively affect perceived work quality and worker evaluations
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1