JUDGMENTAL PROCESS AND CONTENT
Commentary on Koehler on Base-Rate

Abstract

The silence of those who might defend the conventional approach to error is not unusual. Judgments can be evaluated against relevant data in terms of their content, as well as in terms of the normativeness of the process by which they were made.

Keywords

References

• Bernardin, H.J. & Pence, E.C. (1980) Effects of Rater Training: Creating New Response Sets and Decreasing Accuracy. Journal of Applied Psychology, 65, 60-66.
• Funder, D.C. (1987) Errors and Mistakes: Evaluating the Accuracy of Social Judgment. Psychological Bulletin, 101, 75-90.
• Funder, D.C. (1992) Everything You Know Is Wrong [Review of "The Person and the Situation: Perspectives of Social Psychology"]. Contemporary Psychology, 37, 319-320.
• Funder, D.C. (1993) Judgments as Data for Personality and Developmental Psychology: Error vs. Accuracy. In D. Funder, R. Parke, C. Tomlinson-Keasey & K. Widaman (Eds.), Studying Lives Through Time: Approaches to Personality and Development (pp. 121-146). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
• Funder, D.C. (1994) Accuracy Theory: A General Framework for Research on Personality Judgment. Unpublished ms., University of California, Riverside.
• Hammond, K.R., Hamm, R.M., Grassia, J. & Pearson, T. (1987) Direct Comparison of the Efficiency of Intuitive and Analytical Cognition in Expert Judgment. IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man and Cybernetics, 17, 753-770.
• Koehler, J.J. (1993). The Base Rate Fallacy Myth. PSYCOLOQUY 4(49) base-rate.1.koehler.
• Koehler, J.J. (1994). Base Rates and the "Illusion Illusion." PSYCOLOQUY 5(9) base-rate.9.koehler.
• Lusk, C. M. & Hammond, K.R. (1991) Judgment in a Dynamic Task: Microburst Forecasting. Journal of Behavioral Decision Making, 4, 55-73.
• Nilsen, D. (1991, August) Understanding Self vs. Observer Discrepancies in Multi-rater Assessment Systems. Paper presented at the Annual Meetings of the American Psychological Association, San Francisco.