The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Database Models and Managerial Intuition: 50% Model + 50% Manager
Abstract
We focus on ways of combining simple database models with managerial intuition. We present a model and method for isolating managerial intuition. For five different business forecasting situations, our results indicate that a combination of model and manager always outperforms either of these decision inputs in isolation, an average R 2 increase of 0.09 (16%) above the best single decision input in cross-validated model analyses. We assess the validity of an equal weighting heuristic, 50% model + 50% manager, and then discuss why our results might differ from previous research on expert judgment.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
“Clinical versus Actuarial Judgment.”
Dawes, R. M., Faust, D., & Meehl, P. E. (1989) · Science · doi:10.1126/science.2648573 · Cited by 2,298
Cited by
Clinical versus mechanical prediction: a meta-analysis
Grove, W. M., Zald, D. H., Lebow, B. S., Snitz, B. E., & Nelson, C. (2000) · Psychological Assessment · doi:10.1037/1040-3590.12.1.19 · Cited by 1,640
Factors affecting trust in market research relationships
Moorman, C., Deshpandé, R., & Zaltman, G. (1993) · Journal of Marketing · doi:10.1177/002224299305700106 · Cited by 3,659
Receiving other people’s advice: Influence and benefit
Yaniv, I. (2004) · Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes · doi:10.1016/j.obhdp.2003.08.002 · Cited by 652
Manipulating and Measuring Model Interpretability
Poursabzi-Sangdeh, F., Goldstein, D. G., Hofman, J. M., Wortman Vaughan, J. W., & Wallach, H. (2021) · Proceedings of the 2021 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems · doi:10.1145/3411764.3445315 · Cited by 728
Forecasting and operational research: a review
Fildes, R., Nikolopoulos, K., Crone, S. F., & Syntetos, A. A. (2008) · Journal of the Operational Research Society · doi:10.1057/palgrave.jors.2602597 · Cited by 287
Metadata
- Authors
- Blattberg, R. C., & Hoch, S. J.
- Venue
- Management Science
- Published
- 1990-08
- Volume
- 36
- Issue
- 8
- Pages
- 887-899
- ISSN
- 0025-1909 (ISSN-L)
- 1526-5501
- OpenAlex
- W2104546629
- Cited by
- 472
- References
- 1
- FWCI
- 7.78
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
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
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.
