In search of good probability assessors: an experimental comparison of elicitation rules for confidence judgments

DOI10.1007/s11238-015-9509-9zbMath1378.91067OpenAlexW1518830282MaRDI QIDQ266507

Guillaume Hollard, Sébastien Massoni, Jean-Christophe Vergnaud

Publication date: 13 April 2016

Published in: Theory and Decision (Search for Journal in Brave)

Full work available at URL: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11238-015-9509-9

zbMATH Keywords

confidencecalibrationdiscriminationincentivesbelief elicitationscoring rules

Mathematics Subject Classification ID

Decision theory (91B06) Experimental studies (91A90) Applications of statistics to psychology (62P15)

Related Items (6)

Signaling probabilities in ambiguity: who reacts to vague news? ⋮ Confidence biases and learning among intuitive Bayesians ⋮ Belief formation in a signaling game without common prior: an experiment ⋮ Bribing the Self ⋮ Optimal group decision: a matter of confidence calibration ⋮ The uniqueness of local proper scoring rules: the logarithmic family

Uses Software

• Psychophysics Toolbox

Cites Work

• Unnamed Item
• Unnamed Item
• Betting on own knowledge: Experimental test of overconfidence
• Comonotonic proper scoring rules to measure ambiguity and subjective beliefs
• Choice-Based Elicitation and Decomposition of Decision Weights for Gains and Losses Under Uncertainty
• A Mechanism for Eliciting Probabilities
• A Truth Serum for Non-Bayesians: Correcting Proper Scoring Rules for Risk Attitudes
• The Binarized Scoring Rule
• Strictly Proper Scoring Rules, Prediction, and Estimation
• An Experimental Study of Belief Learning Using Elicited Beliefs
• Judgemental Overconfidence, Self-Monitoring, and Trading Performance in an Experimental Financial Market
• Alternative Approaches to the Theory of Choice in Risk-Taking Situations

This page was built for publication: In search of good probability assessors: an experimental comparison of elicitation rules for confidence judgments