{"title":"当不那么自信的预测预示着更多的专业知识时","authors":"Mauricio Palmeira, Timothy Heath","doi":"10.1016/j.obhdp.2025.104431","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>The confidence heuristic indicates that people infer greater expertise from forecasters who express higher confidence. In the present research, we identify two key conditions under which this heuristic breaks down and even reverses. First, we find that cognitive reflection plays a moderating role: less reflective thinkers (as measured by the Cognitive Reflection Test; <span><span>Frederick 2005</span></span>) interpret high confidence as a sign of expertise, whereas more reflective thinkers tend to view it as a signal of incompetence—unless contextual cues suggest high situational certainty. We demonstrate this reversal in both evaluations of a single forecaster and choices between forecasters. Second, we show that when advisors make multiple predictions, variability in their expressed confidence serves as an additional cue to expertise. As a result, advisors can even appear more expert by lowering their average confidence while increasing the variability. We provide evidence for these effects across diverse domains, including financial advice, product performance, and sports outcomes.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":48442,"journal":{"name":"Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes","volume":"190 ","pages":"Article 104431"},"PeriodicalIF":3.4000,"publicationDate":"2025-07-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"When less confident forecasts signal more expertise\",\"authors\":\"Mauricio Palmeira, Timothy Heath\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.obhdp.2025.104431\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><div>The confidence heuristic indicates that people infer greater expertise from forecasters who express higher confidence. In the present research, we identify two key conditions under which this heuristic breaks down and even reverses. First, we find that cognitive reflection plays a moderating role: less reflective thinkers (as measured by the Cognitive Reflection Test; <span><span>Frederick 2005</span></span>) interpret high confidence as a sign of expertise, whereas more reflective thinkers tend to view it as a signal of incompetence—unless contextual cues suggest high situational certainty. We demonstrate this reversal in both evaluations of a single forecaster and choices between forecasters. Second, we show that when advisors make multiple predictions, variability in their expressed confidence serves as an additional cue to expertise. As a result, advisors can even appear more expert by lowering their average confidence while increasing the variability. We provide evidence for these effects across diverse domains, including financial advice, product performance, and sports outcomes.</div></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":48442,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes\",\"volume\":\"190 \",\"pages\":\"Article 104431\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-07-16\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"91\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0749597825000433\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"管理学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"MANAGEMENT\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes","FirstCategoryId":"91","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0749597825000433","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"MANAGEMENT","Score":null,"Total":0}
When less confident forecasts signal more expertise
The confidence heuristic indicates that people infer greater expertise from forecasters who express higher confidence. In the present research, we identify two key conditions under which this heuristic breaks down and even reverses. First, we find that cognitive reflection plays a moderating role: less reflective thinkers (as measured by the Cognitive Reflection Test; Frederick 2005) interpret high confidence as a sign of expertise, whereas more reflective thinkers tend to view it as a signal of incompetence—unless contextual cues suggest high situational certainty. We demonstrate this reversal in both evaluations of a single forecaster and choices between forecasters. Second, we show that when advisors make multiple predictions, variability in their expressed confidence serves as an additional cue to expertise. As a result, advisors can even appear more expert by lowering their average confidence while increasing the variability. We provide evidence for these effects across diverse domains, including financial advice, product performance, and sports outcomes.
期刊介绍:
Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes publishes fundamental research in organizational behavior, organizational psychology, and human cognition, judgment, and decision-making. The journal features articles that present original empirical research, theory development, meta-analysis, and methodological advancements relevant to the substantive domains served by the journal. Topics covered by the journal include perception, cognition, judgment, attitudes, emotion, well-being, motivation, choice, and performance. We are interested in articles that investigate these topics as they pertain to individuals, dyads, groups, and other social collectives. For each topic, we place a premium on articles that make fundamental and substantial contributions to understanding psychological processes relevant to human attitudes, cognitions, and behavior in organizations. In order to be considered for publication in OBHDP a manuscript has to include the following: 1.Demonstrate an interesting behavioral/psychological phenomenon 2.Make a significant theoretical and empirical contribution to the existing literature 3.Identify and test the underlying psychological mechanism for the newly discovered behavioral/psychological phenomenon 4.Have practical implications in organizational context