Spurious consensus and opinion revision: Why might people be more confident in their less accurate judgments?

Abstract

In the interest of improving their decision making, individuals revise their opinions on the basis of samples of opinions obtained from others. However, such a revision process may lead decision makers to experience greater confidence in their less accurate judgments. The authors theorize that people tend to underestimate the informative value of independently drawn opinions, if these appear to conflict with one another, yet place some confidence even in the spurious consensus, which may arise when opinions are sampled interdependently. The experimental task involved people's revision of their opinions (caloric estimates of foods) on the basis of advice. The method of sampling the advisory opinions (independent or interdependent) was the main factor. The results reveal a dissociation between confidence and accuracy. A theoretical underlying mechanism is suggested whereby people attend to consensus (consistency) cues at the expense of information on interdependence. Implications for belief updating and for individual and group decisions are discussed.

Why Are Experts Correlated? Decomposing Correlations Between Judges

“…Thus, he equates expertise (especially in cases where there is no external criterion) with inter-judge agreement. 4 Interestingly, recent empirical work (Budescu & Yu, 2007;Yaniv, Choshen-Hillel, & Milyavsky, 2009) suggests that most people share this intuition and they are highly confident in consensus opinions. The results of the current analysis (especially Section 5.3) suggest that not all these factors are equally important.…”

Big picture is better: The social implications of construal level for advice taking

“…For example, research demonstrates that people show a higher propensity to take advice when they feel grateful (Gino & Schweitzer, 2008) or anxious (Gino, Brooks, & Schweitzer, 2012), when they pay more for the advice (Gino, 2008), when they engage in perspective-taking (Yaniv, Choshen-Hillel, & Milyavsky, 2009) and when they are performing a more difficult task (Gino & Moore, 2007). At the same time, people are less likely to take advice when they feel more powerful (See, Morrison, Rothman, & Soll, 2011;Tost, Gino, & Larrick, 2012), when they are part of a team (Minson & Mueller, 2012) and when they feel angry (Gino & Schweitzer, 2008).…”

The Social Context of Decisions

“…When comparing judgments with each other, they will often be in agreement. Agreement is seductive; it simultaneously boosts their own confidence that they are right (Yaniv et al 2009) and leads them to see the other person as smart. A key driver of poor composition is people in power seeking out others who share their way of thinking.…”