Hide metadata

dc.date.accessioned2019-12-02T19:03:43Z
dc.date.available2019-12-02T19:03:43Z
dc.date.created2018-08-03T10:18:55Z
dc.date.issued2018
dc.identifier.citationTeigen, Karl Halvor Løhre, Erik Hohle, Sigrid Møyner . The boundary effect: Perceived post hoc accuracy of prediction intervals. Judgment and decision making. 2018, 13(4), 309-321
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10852/71085
dc.description.abstractPredictions of magnitudes (costs, durations, environmental events) are often given as uncertainty intervals (ranges). When are such forecasts judged to be correct? We report results of four experiments showing that forecasted ranges of expected natural events (floods and volcanic eruptions) are perceived as accurate when an observed magnitude falls inside or at the boundary of the range, with little regard to its position relative to the “most likely” (central) estimate. All outcomes that fell inside a wide interval were perceived as equally well captured by the forecast, whereas identical outcomes falling outside a narrow range were deemed to be incorrectly predicted, in proportion to the magnitude of deviation. In these studies, ranges function as categories, with boundaries distinguishing between right or wrong predictions, even for outcome distributions that are acknowledged as continuous, and for boundaries that are arbitrarily defined (for instance, when the narrow prediction interval is defined as capturing 50 percent and the wide 90 percent of all potential outcomes). However, the boundary effect is affected by label. When the upper limit of a range is described as a value that “can” occur (Experiment 5), outcomes both below and beyond this value were regarded as consistent with the forecast.
dc.description.abstractThe boundary effect: Perceived post hoc accuracy of prediction intervals
dc.languageEN
dc.publisherSociety for Judgment and Decision Making
dc.rightsAttribution 3.0 Unported
dc.rightsAttribution 3.0 Unported
dc.rights.urihttps://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/
dc.rights.urihttps://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/
dc.titleThe boundary effect: Perceived post hoc accuracy of prediction intervals
dc.typeJournal article
dc.creator.authorTeigen, Karl Halvor
dc.creator.authorLøhre, Erik
dc.creator.authorHohle, Sigrid Møyner
cristin.unitcode185,17,5,0
cristin.unitnamePsykologisk institutt
cristin.ispublishedtrue
cristin.fulltextoriginal
cristin.qualitycode1
dc.identifier.cristin1599585
dc.identifier.bibliographiccitationinfo:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.jtitle=Judgment and decision making&rft.volume=13&rft.spage=309&rft.date=2018
dc.identifier.jtitleJudgment and decision making
dc.identifier.volume13
dc.identifier.issue4
dc.identifier.startpage309
dc.identifier.endpage321
dc.identifier.urnURN:NBN:no-74204
dc.type.documentTidsskriftartikkel
dc.type.peerreviewedPeer reviewed
dc.source.issn1930-2975
dc.identifier.fulltextFulltext https://www.duo.uio.no/bitstream/handle/10852/71085/1/jdm_Teigen_L%25C3%25B8hre_Hohle.pdf
dc.type.versionPublishedVersion
dc.relation.projectNFR/235585


Files in this item

Appears in the following Collection

Hide metadata

Attribution 3.0 Unported
This item's license is: Attribution 3.0 Unported
Attribution 3.0 Unported
This item's license is: Attribution 3.0 Unported