Accountability and adaptive performance under uncertainty: A long-term view
Journal Title: Judgment and Decision Making - Year 2017, Vol 12, Issue 6
Abstract
Accountability pressures are a ubiquitous feature of social systems: virtually everyone must answer to someone for something. Behavioral research has, however, warned that accountability, specifically a focus on being responsible for outcomes, tends to produce suboptimal judgments. We qualify this view by demonstrating the long-term adaptive benefits of outcome accountability in uncertain, dynamic environments. More than a thousand randomly assigned forecasters participated in a ten-month forecasting tournament in conditions of control, process, outcome or hybrid accountability. Accountable forecasters outperformed non-accountable ones. Holding forecasters accountable to outcomes (“getting it right”) boosted forecasting accuracy beyond holding them accountable for process (“thinking the right way”). The performance gap grew over time. Process accountability promoted more effective knowledge sharing, improving accuracy among observers. Hybrid (process plus outcome) accountability boosted accuracy relative to process, and improved knowledge sharing relative to outcome accountability. Overall, outcome and process accountability appear to make complementary contributions to performance when forecasters confront moderately noisy, dynamic environments where signal extraction requires both knowledge pooling and individual judgments.
Authors and Affiliations
Welton Chang, Pavel Atanasov, Shefali Patil, Barbara A. Mellers and Philip E. Tetlock
Keywords
Related Articles
- EP ID EP678320
- DOI -
- Views 136
- Downloads 0
Causal explanations affect judgments of the need for psychological treatment
Knowing what event precipitated a client’s abnormal behaviors makes the client appear more normal than if the event is not known (Meehl, 1973). Does such knowledge also influence judgments of the need for psychological t...
Bracketing effects on risk tolerance: Generalizability and underlying mechanisms
Research has shown that risk tolerance increases when multiple decisions and associated outcomes are presented together in a broader “bracket” rather than one at a time. The present studies disentangle the influence of p...
Dissecting the risky-choice framing effect: Numeracy as an individual-difference factor in weighting risky and riskless options
Using five variants of the Asian Disease Problem, we dissected the risky-choice framing effect by requiring each participant to provide preference ratings for the full decision problem and also to provide attractiveness...
Measuring the relative contributions of rule-based and exemplar-based processes in judgment: Validation of a simple model
Judgments and decisions can rely on rules to integrate cue information or on the retrieval of similar exemplars from memory. Research on exemplar-based processes in judgment has discovered several task variables influenc...
Herbert Simon’s spell on judgment and decision making
How many judgment and decision making (JDM) researchers have not claimed to be building on Herbert Simon’s work? We identify two of Simon’s goals for JDM research: He sought to understand people’s decision processes—the...