Joshua Klayman
University of Chicago
StatisticsMetacognitionCalibration (statistics)Social perceptionDevelopmental psychologyProbability distributionPsychologyActuarial scienceCognitionCognitive psychologyStructure (mathematical logic)Probability mass functionPerspective (graphical)PerceptionInferenceFootballQuality (business)Task (project management)Variation (game tree)Know-howHuman judgmentSelf evaluationOutcome feedbackProbability learningManagerial decisionLack of knowledgeUncertainty quantificationMathematicsAffect (psychology)Organizational behaviorComputer scienceProcess (engineering)Probabilistic logicOverconfidence effectManagement scienceR-CASTSocial psychologyNatural (music)Confirmation biasStatistical hypothesis testingBusiness decision mapping
37Publications
17H-index
3,896Citations
Publications 32
Newest
#1Jackie GneppH-Index: 8
#2Joshua Klayman (U of C: University of Chicago)H-Index: 17
Last. Sema Barlas (U of C: University of Chicago)H-Index: 7
view all 4 authors...
Managerial feedback discussions often fail to produce the desired performance improvements. Three studies shed light on why performance feedback fails and how it can be made more effective. In Study 1, managers described recent performance feedback experiences in their work settings. In Studies 2 and 3, pairs of managers role-played a performance review meeting. In all studies, recipients of mixed and negative feedback doubted the accuracy of the feedback and the providers' qualifications to giv...
Source
#1Jack B. Soll (Duke University)H-Index: 18
#2Asa PalleyH-Index: 4
Last. Don A. Moore (University of California, Berkeley)H-Index: 54
view all 4 authors...
Quantifying uncertainty in the form of a probability distribution is a critical step in many managerial decision problems. However, a large body of previous work has documented pervasive overconfidence in subjective probability distributions (SPDs). We develop new methods to analyze judgments about variables which entail both epistemic and aleatory uncertainty and, in three experiments, study the quality of people’s SPDs in such settings. We find that although SPDs roughly match the aleatory con...
Source
#1Don A. MooreH-Index: 54
#2Joshua KlaymanH-Index: 17
Last. Asa PalleyH-Index: 4
view all 4 authors...
#1Don A. MooreH-Index: 54
#2Joshua KlaymanH-Index: 17
Last. Asa PalleyH-Index: 4
view all 4 authors...
#1Jackie GneppH-Index: 8
#2Joshua KlaymanH-Index: 17
Last. Ian O. WilliamsonH-Index: 4
view all 3 authors...
#1Michael T. Quinn (U of C: University of Chicago)H-Index: 29
#2Jackie GneppH-Index: 8
Last. David O. Meltzer (U of C: University of Chicago)H-Index: 74
view all 8 authors...
Source
#1Claire I. Tsai (U of T: University of Toronto)H-Index: 10
#2Joshua Klayman (U of C: University of Chicago)H-Index: 17
Last. Reid Hastie (U of C: University of Chicago)H-Index: 67
view all 3 authors...
When a person evaluates his or her confidence in a judgment, what is the effect of receiving more judgment-relevant information? We report three studies that show when judges receive more information, their confidence increases more than their accuracy, producing substantial confidence–accuracy discrepancies. Our results suggest that judges do not adjust for the cognitive limitations that reduce their ability to use additional information effectively. We place these findings in a more general fr...
Source
#1Joshua Klayman (U of C: University of Chicago)H-Index: 17
Source
This website uses cookies.
We use cookies to improve your online experience. By continuing to use our website we assume you agree to the placement of these cookies.
To learn more, you can find in our Privacy Policy.