The DOI matches its Crossref record; 4 of the 4 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Focusing techniques: A shortcut to improving probability judgments?
Overview
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
Teaching people reference-class forecasting reduces base-rate neglect more than calling attention to the bias itself.
“Finally, teaching people reference-class forecasting reduces base-rate neglect more than calling attention to the bias itself (Case, Fantino & Goodie, 1999; Fischhoff & Bar-Hillel, 1984; Flyvbjerg, 2008; Kahneman & Tversky, 1977; Lovallo, Clarke &Camerer, 2012).”
From Developing expert political judgment: The impact of training and practice on judgmental accuracy in geopolitical forecasting tournaments (2016) · cites this paper as Fischhoff & Bar-Hillel, 1984
Citations
Cites
Tversky, A., & Kahneman, D. (1974) · Science · doi:10.1126/science.185.4157.1124 · Cited by 28,810
On the psychology of prediction.
Kahneman, D., & Tversky, A. (1973) · Psychological Review · doi:10.1037/h0034747 · Cited by 6,202
Mechanization in problem solving: The effect of Einstellung.
Luchins, A. S. (1942) · Psychological Monographs · doi:10.1037/h0093502 · Cited by 1,143
Evidential impact of base rates
Tversky, A., & Kahneman, D. (1982) · Judgment under Uncertainty · doi:10.1017/cbo9780511809477.011 · Cited by 591
Flagged first, then by citations
Research works printed but not linked: 10
- Bar-Hillel, 1979, The role of sample size in sample evaluation, Organizational Behavior and Human Performance, 24, 245, 10.1016/0030-5073(79)90028-X · DOI
- Bar-Hillel, 1980, The base-rate fallacy in probability judgments, Acta Psychologica, 44, 211, 10.1016/0001-6918(80)90046-3 · DOI
- Fischhoff, 1979, Subjective sensitivity analysis, Organizational Behavior and Human Performance, 23, 339, 10.1016/0030-5073(79)90002-3 · DOI
- Ginosar, 1980, The effects of base rates and individuating information on judgments about another person, Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 16, 228, 10.1016/0022-1031(80)90066-9 · DOI
- Hammerton, 1973, A case of radical probability estimation, Journal of Experimental Psychology, 101, 252, 10.1037/h0035224 · DOI
- Kahneman, 1972, On prediction and judgment, Oregon Research Institute Bulletin, 12
- Kahneman, 1972, Subjective probability: A judgment of representativeness, Cognitive Psychology, 3, 430, 10.1016/0010-0285(72)90016-3 · DOI
- Kahneman, 1982, On the study of statistical intuitions, Cognition, 11, 123, 10.1016/0010-0277(82)90022-1 · DOI
- Lyon, 1976, Dominance of accuracy information and neglect of base rates in probability estimation, Acta Psychologica, 40, 287, 10.1016/0001-6918(76)90032-9 · DOI
- Olson, 1976, Some apparent violations of the representativeness heuristic, Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 2, 599, 10.1037/0096-1523.2.4.599 · DOI
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Extensional versus intuitive reasoning: The conjunction fallacy in probability judgment.
Tversky, A., & Kahneman, D. (1983) · Psychological Review · doi:10.1037/0033-295x.90.4.293 · Cited by 3,991
“Clinical versus Actuarial Judgment.”
Dawes, R. M., Faust, D., & Meehl, P. E. (1989) · Science · doi:10.1126/science.2648573 · Cited by 2,298
Support theory: a nonextensional representation of subjective probability
Tversky, A., & Koehler, D. J. (1994) · Psychological Review · doi:10.1037/0033-295x.101.4.547 · Cited by 1,167
Dunning, D., Meyerowitz, J. A., & Holzberg, A. D. (1989) · Journal of Personality and Social Psychology · doi:10.1037/0022-3514.57.6.1082 · Cited by 758
Chang, W., Chen, E., Mellers, B., & Tetlock, P. (2016) · Judgment and Decision Making · doi:10.1017/s1930297500004599 · Cited by 89
“A number of studies have shed light on how probability estimates and judgments can be improved (Fischbein & Gazit, 1984; Fischhoff & Bar-Hillel, 1984; Stewart, 2001; Tetlock, 2005; Whitecotton, Sanders & Norris, 1998).”
Metadata
- Authors
- Fischhoff, B., & Bar-Hillel, M.
- Affiliations
- Decision Research (US)
- Corresponding author
- Fischhoff, Baruch
- ORCID
- Fischhoff, Baruch
- Venue
- Organizational Behavior and Human Performance
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 1984-10
- Volume
- 34
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 175-194
- ISSN
- 0030-5073 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2055623934
- Cited by
- 114
- References
- 4
- Citations by year
- 2024: 3 · 2023: 1 · 2020: 1 · 2018: 1 · 2016: 2 · 2013: 2 · 2012: 1
- FWCI
- 2.08
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Organizational Behavior and Human Performance (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › General Decision Sciences › Decision-Making and Behavioral Economics
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Family Practice › Clinical Reasoning and Diagnostic Skills
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Bayesian Modeling and Causal Inference
- Keywords
- probability judgment, base rate neglect, normative information, heuristics
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
