Cue-Consistency and Cue-Utilization in Judgment
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
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?
Because judges make predictions with greater confidence when cues are coherent and unambiguous, the highly consistent quantitative output of the ARS may have appeared more diagnostic than the more nuanced human assessment, and the expert's explicit reservations may have signaled lower advisor confidence, which is known to reduce advice taking.
“Because judges make predictions with greater confidence when cues are coherent and unambiguous (Kahneman and Tversky 1973;Slovic 1966), the highly consistent quantitative output of the ARS may have appeared more diagnostic than the more nuanced human assessment, and the expert's explicit reservations may have signaled lower advisor confidence, which is known to reduce advice taking.”
From When Recruiters Meet Algorithms: Advice Taking and Bias in AI‐Assisted Recruitment (2026) · cites this paper as Slovic 1966
Cited by
Sorted by citations
On the psychology of prediction.
Kahneman, D., & Tversky, A. (1973) · Psychological Review · doi:10.1037/h0034747 · Cited by 6,202 · see citing works
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 · see citing works
Employee green behaviour: A review and recommendations for future research
Tang, G., Ren, S., Wang, M., Li, Y., & Zhang, S. (2023) · International Journal of Management Reviews · doi:10.1111/ijmr.12328 · Cited by 138 · see citing works
When Recruiters Meet Algorithms: Advice Taking and Bias in AI‐Assisted Recruitment
Lacroux, A., & Martin Lacroux, C. (2026) · International Journal of Selection and Assessment · doi:10.1111/ijsa.70085
- Authors
- Slovic, P.
- Corresponding author
- Slovic, Paul
- ORCID
- Slovic, Paul
- Venue
- The American Journal of Psychology
- Publisher
- University of Illinois Press
- Published
- 1966-09
- Volume
- 79
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- 427
- ISSN
- 0002-9556 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W1973836215
- Cited by
- 163
- References
- 0
- Citations by year
- 2026: 10 · 2025: 14 · 2024: 6 · 2023: 13 · 2022: 5 · 2021: 5 · 2020: 5 · 2019: 5 · 2018: 6 · 2017: 4 · 2016: 1 · 2015: 1 · 2013: 2
- FWCI
- 3.09
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- The American Journal of Psychology (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › General Decision Sciences › Decision-Making and Behavioral Economics
- Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Visual perception and processing mechanisms
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Family Practice › Clinical Reasoning and Diagnostic Skills
- Keywords
- cue utilization, judgment, decision-making, information processing, heuristics
- MeSH terms
- Cues, Humans, Judgment, Perception, Personality
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
