Show simple item record

dc.contributor.authorDe Baets, Shari
dc.contributor.authorVanderheyden, Karlien
dc.date.accessioned2021-10-11T04:27:33Z
dc.date.available2021-10-11T04:27:33Z
dc.date.issued2021en_US
dc.identifier.issn0888-4080
dc.identifier.doi10.1002/acp.3831
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/20.500.12127/6981
dc.description.abstractWe set out to investigate whether interindividual differences in cognition affect the susceptibility to four forecasting biases: (a) optimism bias, (b) adding noise to forecasts, (c) presuming positive autocorrelation when series are independent, and (d) trend damping. All four biases were prevalent in the results, but we found no consistent relationships with cognition (cognitive style, cognitive reflection). Our sample included both novice and expert forecasters. They did not differ significantly in their susceptibility to biases. The lack of individual differences in bias susceptibility suggests that universal approaches to debiasing are possible.en_US
dc.description.sponsorshipThis work was supported by the FWO-Research Foundation Flanders for Shari De Baets.
dc.language.isoenen_US
dc.publisherWileyen_US
dc.subjectBiasesen_US
dc.subjectCognitive Stylesen_US
dc.subjectForecastingen_US
dc.subjectIndividual Differencesen_US
dc.subjectJudgmenten_US
dc.titleIndividual differences in the susceptibility to forecasting biasesen_US
dc.identifier.journalApplied Cognitive Psychologyen_US
dc.source.volume35en_US
dc.source.issue4en_US
dc.source.beginpage1106en_US
dc.source.endpage1114en_US
dc.contributor.departmentDepartment of Business Informatics and Operations Management, Faculty of Economics and Business Administration, Ghent, Belgiumen_US
vlerick.knowledgedomainPeople Management & Leadershipen_US
vlerick.typearticleJournal article with impact factoren_US
vlerick.vlerickdepartmentPOen_US
dc.identifier.vperid35909en_US


This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record