Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
Hostname: page-component-76fb5796d-9pm4c Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-28T15:13:46.498Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

6 - Subjective Validity Judgments as an Index of Sensitivity to Sampling Bias

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  02 February 2010

Peter Freytag
Affiliation:
University of Heidelberg, Germany
Klaus Fiedler
Affiliation:
Professor of Psychology, University of Heidelberg in Germany
Klaus Fiedler
Affiliation:
Ruprecht-Karls-Universität Heidelberg, Germany
Peter Juslin
Affiliation:
Umeå Universitet, Sweden
Get access

Summary

The 1990s are associated with keywords like new economy and information society. The increased importance of information technologies underlying these phenomena was due primarily to the transformation of the Internet into a medium of mass communication, but the rising number of 24/7 TV stations and the popularity of cellular phones contributed as well. As one side effect of these developments, people in the early twenty-first century are confronted with an unprecedented flood of statistical information. Statistics on almost any topic are available anywhere at any time, whether on the latest unemployment rates, recent trends in climate change, or the odds ratio that a football match will end in a draw when the away team leads by two goals at halftime. At least to anyone trained in statistics, however, the question presents itself whether people have the skills necessary to deal with the available information critically. After all, citizens, politicians, consumers, and managers still have to decide on their own whether to trust a statistic and the conclusions derived from it.

A glance at the major findings accumulated by the heuristics and biases program during the past decades suffices to substantiate a skeptic's position. People have been shown, among other things, to prefer individuating information to base-rate information when estimating conditional probabilities (Bar-Hillel, 1980; Kahneman & Tversky, 1972), to collapse data over levels of significant third variables (Schaller, 1992a, b), and to confuse the conditional probability of a criterion event (e.g., becoming a drug addict) given a predictor event (e.g., having consumed marijuana) with its inverse (Evans, 1989; Sedlmeier, 1999).

Type
Chapter
Information
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2005

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.)

References

Bar-Hillel, M. (1980). The base-rate fallacy in probability judgments. Acta Psychologica, 44, 211–233CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chomsky, N. (2002). Media control. New York: Seven Stories PressGoogle Scholar
Crocker, J. (1981). Judgment of covariation by social perceivers. Psychological Bulletin, 90, 272–292CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Eddy, D. M. (1982). Probabilistic reasoning in clinical medicine: Problems and opportunities. In Kahneman, D., Slovic, P., & Tversky, A. (Eds.), Judgment under uncertainty: Heuristics and biases. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University PressCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Evans, J.St, B. T. (1989). Bias in human reasoning: Causes and consequences. Howe, UK: Lawrence ErlbaumGoogle Scholar
Fiedler, K. (2000a). Beware of samples! A cognitive-ecological sampling approach to judgment biases. Psychological Review, 107, 659–676CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fiedler, K. (2000b). Illusory correlations: a simple associative algorithm provides a convergent account of seemingly divergent paradigms. Review of General Psychology, 4, 25–58CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fiedler, K., Brinkmann, B., Betsch, T., & Wild, B. (2000). A sampling approach to biases in conditional probability judgments: Beyond baserate neglect and statistical format. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 129, 399–418CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fiedler, K., Freytag, P., & Unkelbach, C. (2004a). Great oaks from giant acorns grow: A sampling approach to causal attribution. Unpublished manuscript, University of Heidelberg
Fiedler, K., Freytag, P., Unkelbach, C., Bayer, M., Schreiber, V., Wild, B., & Wilke, M. (2004b). Subjective validity judgments of fictitious research findings: A paradigm for investigating sensitivity to sampling bias. Unpublished manuscript, University of Heidelberg
Fiedler, K., Walther, E., Freytag, P., & Nickel, S. (2003). Inductive reasoning and judgment interference: Experiments on Simpson's paradox. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 29, 14–27CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Fiedler, K., Walther, E., Freytag, P., & Plessner, H. (2002). Judgment biases and pragmatic confusion in a simulated classroom – A cognitive-environmental approach. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 88, 527–561CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fiedler, K., Walther, E., Freytag, P., & Stryczek, E. (2002). Playing mating games in foreign cultures: A conceptual framework and an experimental paradigm for trivariate statistical inference. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 38, 14–30CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fiedler, K., Walther, E., & Nickel, S. (1999). The auto-verification of social hypotheses: Stereotyping and the power of sample size. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 77, 5–18Google Scholar
Fischhoff, B., Slovic, P., & Lichtenstein, S. (1979). Subjective sensitivity analysis. Organizational Behavior and Human Performance, 23, 339–359CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gigerenzer, G., & Hoffrage, U. (1995). How to improve Bayesian reasoning without instructions: Frequency formats. Psychological Review, 102, 684–704CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kahneman, D., & Tversky, A. (1972). Subjective probability: A judgment of representativeness. Cognitive Psychology, 3, 430–453CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Plessner, H., Hartmann, C., Hohmann, N., & Zimmermann, I. (2001). Achtung Stichprobe! Der Einfluss der Informationsgewinnung auf die Bewertung sportlicher Leistungen (Beware of samples! The influence of information gathering on the evaluation of performance in sports). Psychologie und Sport, 8, 91–100Google Scholar
Schaller, M. (1992a). Sample size, aggregation, and statistical reasoning in social inference. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 28, 65–85CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schaller, M. (1992b). In-group favoritism and statistical reasoning in social inference: Implications for formation and maintenance of group stereotypes. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 63, 61–74CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schaller, M., Asp, C. H., Rosell, M. C., & Heim, S. J. (1996). Training in statistical reasoning inhibits the formation of erroneous group stereotypes. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 22, 829–844CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schwarz, N. (1994). Judgment in a social context: Biases, shortcomings, and the logic of conversation. In Zanna, M. P. (Ed.), Advances in experimental social psychology (Vol. 26, pp. 123–162). San Diego: Academic PressGoogle Scholar
Sedlmeier, P. (1999). Improving statistical reasoning: Theoretical models and practical implications. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence ErlbaumGoogle Scholar
Wells, G., & Windschitl, P. D. (1999). Stimulus sampling and social psychological experimentation. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 25, 1115–1125CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Save book to Kindle

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure coreplatform@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Available formats
×

Save book to Dropbox

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

Available formats
×

Save book to Google Drive

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

Available formats
×