Perceiving outcomes as determined by external forces: The role of event construal in attenuating the outcome bias

Savani, Krishna; King, Dan

doi:10.1016/j.obhdp.2015.05.002

Cited by 27 publications

(16 citation statements)

References 45 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Based on these findings and the relative ease of collecting data quickly on MTurk, we speculate that the increasing pressure for replication (Pashler and Harris, 2012 ; Klein et al, 2014 ; Stanley and Spence, 2014 ; Maxwell et al, 2015 ) may be a partial cause of MTurk's increasing popularity. We add that although some research has been published in top management journals using only MTurk samples (i.e., Barber et al, 2013 ; DeKay et al, 2014 ; Karim and Behrend, 2014 ; Karim et al, 2014 ; Credé and Harms, 2015 ; Proudfoot et al, 2015 ; Saqib and Chan, 2015 ; Savani and King, 2015 ; Fine and Pirak, 2016 ), this is relatively rare as only 9 out of 138 published articles exclusively used MTurk samples.…”

Section: Mturk Trends In the Organizational Sciencesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Systems Perspective of Amazon Mechanical Turk for Organizational Research: Review and Recommendations

2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Amazon Mechanical Turk (MTurk) is becoming a prevalent source of quick and cost effective data for organizational research, but there are questions about the appropriateness of the platform for organizational research. To answer these questions, we conducted an integrative review based on 75 papers evaluating the MTurk platform and 250 MTurk samples used in organizational research. This integrative review provides four contributions: (1) we analyze the trends associated with the use of MTurk samples in organizational research; (2) we develop a systems perspective (recruitment system, selection system, and work management system) to synthesize and organize the key factors influencing data collected on MTurk that may affect generalizability and data quality; (3) within each factor, we also use available MTurk samples from the organizational literature to analyze key issues (e.g., sample characteristics, use of attention checks, payment); and (4) based on our review, we provide specific recommendations and a checklist for data reporting in order to improve data transparency and enable further research on this issue.

show abstract

Section: Mturk Trends In the Organizational Sciencesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Systems Perspective of Amazon Mechanical Turk for Organizational Research: Review and Recommendations

2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Section: Research Overview and Hypothesesmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Previous research has shown that counterfactual thinking has a direct effect on responsibility attribution, as it enhances the saliency of the causal role played by the actor focused on in the counterfactual (Grenier et al, 2007; Roese & Olson, 1996; Savani & King, 2015). Counterfactual thinking has also an indirect effect on responsibility attribution, as it influences the importance attributed to factors like intentionality, outcome foreseeability and severity (Alicke, 2000; Alicke et al, 1994; Gambetti et al, 2017; Knobe, 2010; Lagnado & Channon, 2008).…”

Section: Research Overview and Hypothesesmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In particular, some studies have focused on the effects of counterfactual direction, that is, thinking of how things could have been better (upward counterfactual) or worse (downward counterfactual). Generating upward (vs. downward) counterfactuals affects retrospective outcome evaluation and, in turn, increases responsibility attribution (Grenier, Peecher, & Piercy, 2007; Roese & Olson, 1996; Savani & King, 2015). Furthermore, generating upward counterfactuals influences the perceived predictability of an outcome, which in turn is associated with intentionality judgement (Gambetti et al, 2017).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

How expert witnesses' counterfactuals influence causal and responsibility attributions of mock jurors and expert judges

Catellani

Bertolotti

Vagni

et al. 2020

Applied Cognitive Psychology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Past research has shown that counterfactual ("If…then…") thoughts influence causal and responsibility attribution in the judicial context. However, little is known on whether and how the use of counterfactuals in communication affects lay jurors' and judges' evaluations. In two studies, we asked mock lay jurors (Study 1) and actual judges (Study 2) to read a medical malpractice case followed by an expert witness report, which included counterfactuals focused on either the physician, the patient, or external factors. Results showed that counterfactual focus had a strong effect on both lay jurors' and judges' causal and responsibility attributions. Counterfactual focus also moderated the effect of outcome foreseeability on responsibility attribution. Discussion focuses on how counterfactual communication can direct causal and responsibility attribution and reduce the importance of other factors known to influence judicial decision-making. The potential implications of these findings in training programs and debiasing interventions are also discussed.

show abstract

“…Outcome bias can affect doctors' medical decision‐making (Ghosh & Lusch, 2000). For example, Savani and King (2015) run three experiments and demonstrate that there is outcome bias in medical decision‐making. Sacchi and Cherubini (2004) find that outcome bias affects doctors' own diagnostic decision evaluations.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Do professional norms in the medical industry favor outcome bias?

2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This study tests the effect of doctors' professional identity on their outcome bias. We conduct a medical experiment with 264 doctors, a robustness test with 105 doctors, and a public experiment with 170 non‐doctors. The experimental results show that doctors, but not non‐doctors, exhibit more outcome bias when we exogenously render their professional identity more salient. These results indicate that professional norms in the medical industry favor outcome bias.

show abstract

Perceiving outcomes as determined by external forces: The role of event construal in attenuating the outcome bias

Cited by 27 publications

References 45 publications

Systems Perspective of Amazon Mechanical Turk for Organizational Research: Review and Recommendations

Systems Perspective of Amazon Mechanical Turk for Organizational Research: Review and Recommendations

How expert witnesses' counterfactuals influence causal and responsibility attributions of mock jurors and expert judges

Do professional norms in the medical industry favor outcome bias?

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About