Exploring the Links Between Probability Judgments and Comparative Judgments [and the Biases that Influence Them]

通常，人们必须做出判断，要求他们考虑一个目标实体（例如，一个人、一个物体、一个事件）与一个特定的参照物或一组参照物的比较。其中一种判断是概率判断。当被问及“密歇根大学赢得十大篮球锦标赛的可能性有多大？”时，受访者不仅要考虑密歇根大学球队的实力，还要考虑其他球队在比赛中的实力。另一个这样的判断是明确的比较判断。当被问及“密歇根大学与十大联盟中的其他球队相比有多好？”时，受访者不仅要考虑密歇根大学的实力，还要考虑十大联盟中其他球队的实力。理解这两种类型的判断是至关重要的，因为它们是生活中各种各样领域的决策和行为的基础。例如，医生对病人患a病而不是B病或C病的信心可以影响治疗决策；雇主对经理X的工作效率与公司其他经理相比的判断可能是绩效加薪的依据；消费者对小型货车Y相对于其他考虑中的小型货车的安全性的判断可能会影响消费者将在该小型货车上花费的金额。尽管在概率判断和比较判断之间存在结构上的重叠，但这两种形式的判断尚未在同一一般范式中进行系统的比较或同时测试。本研究将探讨这两种形式的指称依赖判断之间的主要共性和差异。该提案还概述了一个框架，用于理解三种主要类型的偏见（自我中心主义，焦点主义和多参照偏见）如何影响概率和比较判断。许多拟议的实验将测试偏见如何影响两种判断形式的可能差异。总的来说，这些研究将促进理论框架的发展，为调解有偏见和无偏见的参照依赖判断的主要过程提供更广泛和更综合的理解。

Often people must make judgments that require them to consider how a target entity (e.g., a person, object, event) compares to a specific referent or set of referents. One such judgment is a probability judgment. When asked "How likely is Michigan to win the Big Ten Basketball Tournament?" a respondent must consider not only the strength of the Michigan team, but also the strengths of other teams in the tournament. Another such judgment is an explicit comparative judgment. When asked "How good is Michigan compared to the other teams in the Big Ten?" a respondent must again consider not only the strength of the Michigan team, but also the strengths of other teams in the Big Ten. Understanding these two types of judgment, which can be collectively called referent-dependent judgments, is critical because they underlie decisions and behaviors within wide variety of life's domains. For example, a doctor's confidence that a patient has Disease A rather than Disease B or C can influence treatment decisions; an employer's judgment of how Manager X's productivity compares to other managers in the company might be the basis for a merit raise; and a consumer's judgment of how safe Minivan Y is relative to other minivans under consideration might influence the amount of money the consumer will spend on that minivan. Despite the structural overlap between probability and comparative judgments, these two forms of judgment have not been systematically compared or simultaneously tested within the same general paradigm. The proposed research will investigate the key commonalities and differences among these two forms of referent-dependent judgments. The proposal also outlines a framework for understanding how three major types of biases (egocentrism, focalism, and multiple-referent biases) have the potential to influence both probability and comparative judgments. Many of the proposed experiments will test for possible differences in how the biases might influence the two forms of judgment. Overall, these studies would facilitate the development of a theoretical framework that provides a broader and more synthetic understanding of the major processes that mediate both biased and unbiased referent-dependent judgments.