Skip to Main Content
 

Global Search Box

 
 
 

ETD Abstract Container

Abstract Header

A Competitive Advantage: Disaggregated Judgments

Gloudemans, Colin A.
http://rave.ohiolink.edu/etdc/view?acc_num=ohiou1625688234060059

Abstract Details

2021, Master of Science (MS), Ohio University, Experimental Psychology (Arts and Sciences).
This study examines the differences between two types of judgment methods in terms of their resulting accuracy: holistic judgments and disaggregated judgments. Holistic judgments are judgments made by mentally combining all the information given to make an assessment. Disaggregated judgments, in contrast, combine ratings/subjective assessments of each piece information (i.e., cues) that represents an evaluated object. That is, instead of letting the participant combine cues mentally to render an overall evaluation, the disaggregated method asks participants to judge each cue, and uses a simple aggregation, performed independently of the person judging the cues to produce an overall evaluation. Past research found accuracy advantages of the disaggregated method over the holistic method. To test the robustness of the disaggregation advantage, we attempted to bias participant judgments by incorporating an irrelevant, yet affective cue into their judgments. The effect of biased information on these types of judgments has been theorized, but not properly or explicitly examined. In this study, 179 participants made holistic and disaggregated judgements about college football passing efficiency scores. Results showed no advantage of the disaggregated judgments in terms of criterion validity relating estimated performance to the objective passing efficiency scores. Notably, adding an affective cue into the judgment hurt all judgment methods alike. Further, we explored the biasing cue’s usage patterns by examining regression β weights across participants; results showed no greater proportion of biased cue usage, relative to chance, in the holistic judgments. Finally, we examined if the level of sports fandom negatively impacted holistic judgments more than disaggregated judgments and found no difference. Post-hoc analyses utilized the lens model framework in an attempt to improve judgment accuracy. We found that statistically weighting disaggregated judgments as well as substituting the judge with their model (i.e., model of man) resulted in a significant accuracy increase across participants. Explanations for the similarities in judgment method outcomes are given with a focus on judgment environment and task characteristics.
Claudia Gonzalez-Vallejo (Advisor)
Keith Markman (Committee Member)
Bruce Carlson (Committee Member)
90 p.
Psychology
JDM; decision aids; disaggregated judgments; bias

Recommended Citations

Citations

  • Gloudemans, C. A. (2021). A Competitive Advantage: Disaggregated Judgments [Master's thesis, Ohio University]. OhioLINK Electronic Theses and Dissertations Center. http://rave.ohiolink.edu/etdc/view?acc_num=ohiou1625688234060059

    APA Style (7th edition)

  • Gloudemans, Colin. A Competitive Advantage: Disaggregated Judgments. 2021. Ohio University, Master's thesis. OhioLINK Electronic Theses and Dissertations Center, http://rave.ohiolink.edu/etdc/view?acc_num=ohiou1625688234060059.

    MLA Style (8th edition)

  • Gloudemans, Colin. "A Competitive Advantage: Disaggregated Judgments." Master's thesis, Ohio University, 2021. http://rave.ohiolink.edu/etdc/view?acc_num=ohiou1625688234060059

    Chicago Manual of Style (17th edition)

ohiou1625688234060059
240
© 2021, all rights reserved.
This open access ETD is published by Ohio University and OhioLINK.
Release 3.2.12