Search PubMed⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search PubMed

Results for “Judgment”

Search indexed PubMed citations on genomics, clinical trials, systematic reviews and public health. Explore titles, authors and supplied subject terms, then open the PubMed record.

Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.

At least 343 records · Page 19Linked to original sources
PubMed2003

Interpersonal orientation and the accuracy of personality judgments.

Are those who are more invested in developing and maintaining interpersonal relationships able to provide more accurate judgments of others' personality characteristics? Previous research has produced mixed findings. In the present study, a conceptual framework was presented and methods were used that overcome many of the problems encountered in past research on judgmental accuracy. On four occasions, 102 judges watched a 12-min videotaped dyadic interaction and described the personality of a designated target person. Judges' personality characteristics were described by self, parents, and friends. Results revealed that psychological communion was positively associated with judges' accuracy in rating targets' personality characteristics. In addition, whereas women were more communal and provided more accurate judgments than men, the relationship between communion and accuracy held after controlling for the effect of gender. Finally, preliminary findings suggested that interpersonally oriented individuals may sometimes draw on information about themselves and about stereotypical others to facilitate accurate judgments of others.

Adult↗
PubMed2000

Sadness and susceptibility to judgmental bias: the case of anchoring.

In a wide range of empirical paradigms, sadness has been associated with more extensive and detail-oriented thinking than happiness, resulting in reductions in judgmental bias that arise from reliance on stereotypes and other simple decision heuristics. It was hypothesized that anchoring would constitute a significant exception to this general pattern. Recent research on anchoring indicates that an active thought process underlies the emergence of this bias. If sad people are likely to think more actively about the judgmental anchor than their neutral-mood counterparts, their subsequent judgments should be more likely to be assimilated toward this reference point. This prediction was confirmed in two experiments demonstrating that sad people are indeed more susceptible to anchoring bias than are people in a neutral mood. Moreover, this effect generalized over judgments in positive, neutral, and negative content domains.

Adult↗
PubMed2000

Persistence during extinction: are judgments of persistence affected by contingency information?

The partial reinforcement extinction effect (PREE), defined as increased behavioral persistence following intermittent reward, is considered an important outcome of instrumental learning contingencies, both inside and outside the laboratory. Since adults have a rich experience with situations in which desired outcomes depend on instrumental responding, we asked whether that experience affects judgments of persistence when relevant contingency information is manipulated. Subjects read simple scenarios with information about behaviors generated by high vs. low reward rate, and then judged the resultant persistence of these behaviors under no-reward conditions. Studies 1 and 2 found no evidence that persistence judgments were affected by contingency information in naive subjects. Studies 3 and 4 compared groups with and without explicit knowledge about behavioral psychology and thus tested possible effects of that knowledge for persistence more directly. Judgments in naive subjects were not reliably influenced by reward rate information, but subjects possessing expert knowledge demonstrated judgments that were reliably affected by contingency information. The results indicate that people do not generate generalized knowledge from normal experience with occasional vs. regular reward. Possible explanations and implications of these findings are discussed.

Analysis of Variance↗
PubMed2002

Does mood influence the realism of confidence judgments?

Previous research has shown that mood affects cognition, but the extent to which mood affects meta-cognitive judgments is a relatively over-looked issue. In the current study we investigated how mood influences the degree of realism in participants' confidence judgments (based on an episodic memory task). Using music and film in combination, we successfully induced an elated mood in half of the participants, but failed to induce a sad mood in the other half. In line with previous research, the participants in both conditions were overconfident in their judgments. However, and contrary to our prediction, our data indicated that there was no difference in the realism of the confidence between the conditions. When relating this result to previous research, our conclusion is that there is no, or very little, influence of mood of moderate intensity on the realism of confidence judgments.

Adult↗
PubMedDate not supplied

Children's thinking about diversity of belief in the early school years: judgments of relativism, tolerance, and disagreeing persons.

Children's thinking about diversity of belief in 4 realms--morality, taste, facts, and ambiguous facts--was examined. Ninety-six participants (ages 5, 7, and 9) were interviewed about beliefs different from their own that were endorsed by characters with different status; their judgments of relativism, tolerance, and disagreeing persons were assessed. Five-year-olds made fewer relative and tolerant judgments than 7- and 9-year-olds. Nevertheless, participants of all ages organized their judgments according to the realm of diversity, thought that some beliefs are relative and some are nonrelative, and made tolerant judgments of some divergent beliefs (and their proponents) but not of others. The findings suggest that, in the early school years, children have multiple and well-differentiated perspectives on belief diversity.

Attitude↗
PubMed2006

The role of conscious reasoning and intuition in moral judgment: testing three principles of harm.

Is moral judgment accomplished by intuition or conscious reasoning? An answer demands a detailed account of the moral principles in question. We investigated three principles that guide moral judgments: (a) Harm caused by action is worse than harm caused by omission, (b) harm intended as the means to a goal is worse than harm foreseen as the side effect of a goal, and (c) harm involving physical contact with the victim is worse than harm involving no physical contact. Asking whether these principles are invoked to explain moral judgments, we found that subjects generally appealed to the first and third principles in their justifications, but not to the second. This finding has significance for methods and theories of moral psychology: The moral principles used in judgment must be directly compared with those articulated in justification, and doing so shows that some moral principles are available to conscious reasoning whereas others are not.

Adult↗
PubMed2004

Note on the rationality of rule-based versus exemplar-based processing in human judgment.

This paper reports a study of the relationship between rule- versus exemplar-based processing and criteria for rationality of judgment. Participants made probability judgments in a classification task devised by S. W. Allen and L. R. Brooks (1991). In the exemplar condition, the miscalibration was accounted for by stochastic components of the judgment with a format-dependence effect, implying simultaneous over- and underconfidence depending on the response scale. In the rule condition, there was an overconfidence bias not accounted for by the stochastic components of judgment. In both conditions the participants were additive on average and reasonably transitive, but the larger stochastic component in the exemplar condition produced somewhat larger absolute deviations. The results suggest that exemplar processes are unbiased but more perturbed by stochastic components, while rule-based processes may be more prone to bias.

Adult↗
PubMed1992

Expert judgment in risk analysis and management: process, context, and pitfalls.

The regulation and management of hazardous industrial activities increasingly rely on formal expert judgment processes to provide wisdom in areas of science and technology where traditional "good science" is, in practice, unable to supply unambiguous "facts." Expert judgment has always played a significant, if often unrecognized, role in analysis; however, recent trends are to make it formal, explicit, and documented so it can be identified and reviewed by others. We propose four categories of expert judgment and present three case studies which illustrate some of the pitfalls commonly encountered in its use. We conclude that there will be an expanding policy role for formal expert judgment and that the openness, transparency, and documentation that it requires have implications for enhanced public involvement in scientific and technical affairs.

Expert Testimony↗
PubMed2001

Does experience influence judgments of pain behaviour? Evidence from relatives of pain patients and therapists.

OBJECTIVE: Judgments about an individual's pain can be profoundly important to sufferers. Relatively few studies have examined variables that may affect observers' judgments of the pain of others. The present article reports two studies investigating the relationship between different kinds of exposure to pain problems and observers' ratings of the pain intensity of patients. DESIGN: In the first study, 82 observers were classified into groups with positive and negative family histories of chronic pain. They viewed a videotape showing the facial expressions of shoulder pain patients undergoing physiotherapy assessments and rated the pain experienced by the subjects. In the second study, the data from observers having no experience with pain problems were compared with data collected from therapists having considerable experience with pain problems. RESULTS: Observers with a positive family history of chronic pain attributed greater pain to the patients than those with a negative family history of chronic pain. Professionals' pain judgments were lower than those of control subjects. CONCLUSIONS: Together, the findings imply that one's experiences with the different problems of pain patients may affect pain judgments. Alternative interpretations of the findings are considered.

Adult↗
PubMed2005

The role of VMPC in metamemorial judgments of content retrievability.

Making judgments about the retrievability of information is a critical part of the metamemory processes engaged during remembering. A recent study of patients with frontal lesions suggests that ventral medial prefrontal cortex (VMPC) plays a critical role in such judgments [Schnyer, D. M., Verfaellie, M., Alexander, M. P., Lafleche, G., Nicholls, L., & Kaszniak, A. W. A role for right medial prefrontal cortex in accurate feeling of knowing judgments: Evidence from patients with lesions to frontal cortex. Neuropsychologia, 42, 957-966, 2004]. The observed impairment was thought to reflect an inability to determine the accessibility of memory contents. To further examine the neuroanatomical basis of content accessibility assessment, we used fMRI in an episodic feeling-of-knowing (FOK) paradigm. Participants were asked to make trial-by-trial predictions about the retrievability of the final word that completed studied sentences and then to select the correct completion from among alternatives. Results indicated that the VMPC is engaged during accurate FOK judgments and its activation is modulated by retrieval rating. Structural equations modeling supported the notion that VMPC, as part of a broader left hemisphere network involved in memory retrieval, monitors the output of the retrieval process. More generally, VMPC may participate in metacognitive processes that allow for the comparison of available data against an internal model.

Adult↗
PubMed2000

Dentists' judgment strategies on prophylactic removal of mandibular third molars.

The number of molars selected for prophylactic removal varies widely among general dental practitioners and oral surgeons. To understand the basis for such variations, we investigated two hypotheses: (1) Individual judgment strategies will differ concerning the use of cues (items of information), and (2) few dentists will integrate the cues according to evidence in the literature. To analyze 30 general dental practitioners' (GDPs) and 10 oral surgeons' use of cues in the judgment preceding the treatment decision, we used the Brunwik's lens as a conceptual model. The cues were the patient's age, and the angular position and the degree of impaction of the molar. The clinical situation was simulated by written case descriptions. The proportion of variation explained by the cues and their combinations (total model) varied between 61% and 100% and between 4% and 76% as main effects. Two GDPs and one oral surgeon integrated the cues additively, i.e., any of the cues is independent of the other cues in the judgment. In general, the dentists integrated the cues interactively, i.e., the impact of one cue depends on the levels of some other cues. Even though most variations in judgments were accounted for by the cues, the dentists did not integrate the cues according to evidence in the literature and lacked insight into their decision-making thought processes.

Adult↗
PubMedDate not supplied

Availability, wishful thinking, and physicians' diagnostic judgments for patients with suspected bacteremia.

A prospective cohort study was done to assess the effects of value bias and the inappropriate use of the availability heuristic on physicians' judgments of the probability of bacteremia. Subjects of the study were 227 medical inpatients in a university hospital who had blood cultures done. Estimates of the probabilities that individual patients would have positive blood cultures were collected from the house officers who ordered the cultures. Clinical data and culture results were also obtained. Based on the data the authors calculated "value variables," reflecting doctors' assessments of the risks that individual patients would die in the hospital if they were to have bacteremia. "Recalled experience variables" reflected the doctors' recollections of recent experiences with patients with bacteremia. The physicians significantly overestimated the likelihood of bacteremia for most of their patients. Their ROC curve for this diagnosis showed moderate discriminating ability (area = 0.687, SE = 0.073). Two recalled experience variables were significantly associated with the physicians' probability estimates. The value variables were significantly inversely associated with them. These relationships were independent of several clinical variables and measures of disease severity. The physicians' intuitive diagnostic judgments were thus influenced by the availability heuristic and by wishful thinking, a form of the value bias. The availability heuristic may mislead physicians by causing them to believe that random variations in the prevalence of a nonepidemic disease represent real trends. Wishful thinking may lead physicians to underestimate the likelihood of a disease for patients most at risk for its consequences. Teaching physicians to develop better judgmental strategies may improve the quality of their judgments and hence their patient care.

Anti-Bacterial Agents↗
PubMedDate not supplied

Judgment processes for medication acceptance: self-reports and configural information use.

In the present study college student (N = 186) made judgments of the likelihood of accepting a medication for treatment of a hypothetically experienced clinical depression. Three types of information were manipulated: effectiveness of the medication for alleviating the symptoms of depression, potential side effects of the medication, and severity of depression hypothetically being experienced. The functional-measurement approach was used to examine whether self-reports are related to judgments and whether there is configurality in judging likelihood of medication acceptance. The results showed that subjects who reported different variables to be most important had predictably different effects of the variables in their judgments. There was also evidence for configural combination of information, and the nature of the configurality differed between subjects who reported Depression versus Side Effects as the most important type of information, respectively. The results show how the same information can be used differently by different individuals in making judgments, and that self-reports may reveal some important aspects of how information is used. The implications of the individual differences for health care consumer decision making and health care professionals' assessments and interventions are discussed.

Decision Making↗
PubMed2002

Violations of out-group and in-group regulations in the eyes of ordinary and protected prisoners: an instance of judgmental modularity.

According to the functional theory of cognition, everyday life blaming for wrongdoing reflects individuals' functional morality. The judgments of normative people were found to be modular, that is, changeable as a function of the social role taken at the moment of the judgment. This article presents several empirical indications that prisoners' functional moral judgments are modular as well. These studies were conducted within the experimental framework of functional measurement, which was chosen due to its ability to bypass prisoners' suspicion and resistance to out-group investigations. The studies focus on delinquents' core moral issues such as eyewitness testimony and informing to out-group authorities. As expected, the judgments of ordinary and protected inmates were modular. It is claimed that these findings are applicable to offender rehabilitation and correction and to offender therapy.

Attitude↗
PubMed2006

Evidence for an elders' advantage in the naive product usability judgments of older and younger adults.

OBJECTIVE: To determine whose naive judgments of consumer product usability are more accurate--those of younger or older adults. Accuracy is here defined as judgments compatible with results from performance-based usability tests. BACKGROUND: Older adults may be better able to predict usability problems than younger adults, making them particularly good participants in studies contributing to the user-centered design of products. This advantage, if present, may stem from older adults' motivation for more usable products or from their experience adapting their own environments to meet their changing physical, cognitive, and sensory needs. METHOD: Sixty older participants (ages 65-75 years) and 60 younger ones (ages 18-22 years) evaluated illustrations of consumer products on specific criteria (e.g., readability, learnability, or error rates). They either rated a single design for each product or ranked six alternative designs. They also explained their choices, indicated which features were most critical for usability, and selected usability-enhancing modifications. RESULTS: Although there was no reliable age difference in the amount of usability information provided in the open-ended explanations, older adults were more accurate at ranking alternative designs, selecting the most usability-critical features, and selecting usability-enhancing modifications (all ps < .05). CONCLUSION: The usability judgments of older adults are more accurate than those of younger adults when these judgments are solicited in a fixed-alternative, but not open-ended, format. APPLICATION: Because older adults are more discerning about potential product usability problems, they may be particularly valuable as research participants in early-stage design research (prior to the availability of working prototypes).

Adolescent↗
PubMedDate not supplied

Diabetologists' judgments of diabetic control: reliability and mathematical simulation.

In study 1, laboratory and supervised blood or urine test data from actual cases were used to develop patient profiles. Seven diabetologists from the same institution rated the diabetic control of 125 profiles on a four-point scale (1 = poor, 2 = fair, 3 = good, 4 = excellent). Six of the 7 diabetologists demonstrated adequate intra- and interrater reliability. Study 2 assessed the reliability of judgments of diabetic control made by diabetologists working in two different settings. There were 9 raters from institution 1 and 8 from institution 2. The impact of the amount and type of information on judgment reliability was evaluated by developing two types of profiles. The test form contained only laboratory and supervised blood or urine test data similar to that utilized in study 1. The history form contained this information as well as other descriptive data typically available to diabetologists. The 17 diabetologists rated 125 anonymous profiles on each of two separate occasions approximately 1 wk apart. On one occasion they rated profiles presented on the test form. On the other occasion they rated profiles presented on the history form. As in study 1, the diabetologist raters demonstrated adequate intra- and interrater reliability. Intrarater reliability was somewhat better when rating test form profiles compared with history form profiles. Reliability was not higher within than between institutions. An analysis of the relative contribution of different diabetes control indices to the diabetologists' judgments indicated that HbA1 influenced raters' judgments at both institutions more than any other single variable.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 250 WORDS)

Adolescent↗
PubMed1975

Integration of information in a clinical judgment task, an empirical comparison of six models.

Six models were compared for their effectiveness in reproducing six clinical psychologists' judgments of 38 patients on intelligence, ability to establish contact, and control of affect and impulses. In two of the models, subjective weights were used in the prediction of a judge's ratings. The judges based their judgments solely on verbal protocols from the Rorschach, a sentence completion test, and the Thematic Apperception test. The stability of the linear aspect of the judgment process was very high but decreased as the depth of interpretation of the rating variable increased. The nonlinear aspect of the judgment process had considerably low stability. In general, a model based on subjective weights was most effective in reproducing the judges' ratings.

Adolescent↗
PubMed1980

Length judgments of body parts.

Independent groups of subjects judged the size of four body-parts and four nonbody stimuli under two size-instruction conditions. The shapes of the nonbody stimuli approximated the shapes of the body-parts. For both apparent and objective size instructions, the pattern of errors of body-part judgments confirmed the findings of Shontz (1969); judgmental errors of head-width and forearm-length were significantly greater than judgmental errors of hand-length and foot-length. Although not significant statistically, a similar pattern of errors was obtained for nonbody size judgments.

Adult↗