粗级:以隐瞒信息的方式告知公众

Rick Harbaugh, E. Rasmusen
{"title":"粗级:以隐瞒信息的方式告知公众","authors":"Rick Harbaugh, E. Rasmusen","doi":"10.2139/ssrn.2166353","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Certifiers of quality often report only coarse grades to the public despite having measured quality more finely, e.g., \"Pass\" or \"Certified\" instead of \"73 out of 100\". Why? We show that coarse grades result in more information being provided to the public because the coarseness encourages those of middling quality to apply for certification. Dropping exact grading in favor of the best coarse grading scheme always reduces public uncertainty because the extra participation outweighs the coarser reporting. In some circumstances, the coarsest meaningful grading scheme, pass-fail grading, is the most informative.","PeriodicalId":443127,"journal":{"name":"Behavioral Marketing eJournal","volume":"6 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2012-10-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"64","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Coarse Grades: Informing the Public by Withholding Information\",\"authors\":\"Rick Harbaugh, E. Rasmusen\",\"doi\":\"10.2139/ssrn.2166353\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Certifiers of quality often report only coarse grades to the public despite having measured quality more finely, e.g., \\\"Pass\\\" or \\\"Certified\\\" instead of \\\"73 out of 100\\\". Why? We show that coarse grades result in more information being provided to the public because the coarseness encourages those of middling quality to apply for certification. Dropping exact grading in favor of the best coarse grading scheme always reduces public uncertainty because the extra participation outweighs the coarser reporting. In some circumstances, the coarsest meaningful grading scheme, pass-fail grading, is the most informative.\",\"PeriodicalId\":443127,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Behavioral Marketing eJournal\",\"volume\":\"6 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2012-10-24\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"64\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Behavioral Marketing eJournal\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2166353\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Behavioral Marketing eJournal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2166353","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 64

摘要

质量认证机构通常只向公众报告粗糙的等级,尽管他们对质量进行了更精细的测量,例如“通过”或“认证”,而不是“100分中的73分”。为什么?我们表明,粗糙的等级导致向公众提供更多的信息,因为粗糙鼓励中等质量的人申请认证。放弃精确的评分而采用最佳的粗略评分方案总是能减少公众的不确定性,因为额外的参与比粗略的报告更重要。在某些情况下,最粗略的有意义的评分方案,及格-不及格评分,是最具信息量的。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Coarse Grades: Informing the Public by Withholding Information
Certifiers of quality often report only coarse grades to the public despite having measured quality more finely, e.g., "Pass" or "Certified" instead of "73 out of 100". Why? We show that coarse grades result in more information being provided to the public because the coarseness encourages those of middling quality to apply for certification. Dropping exact grading in favor of the best coarse grading scheme always reduces public uncertainty because the extra participation outweighs the coarser reporting. In some circumstances, the coarsest meaningful grading scheme, pass-fail grading, is the most informative.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信