Intuitive Biases in Choice Versus Estimation: Implications for the Wisdom of Crowds
Embargo Date
Related Collections
Degree type
Discipline
Subject
Organizational Behavior and Theory
Other Business
Other Education
Funder
Grant number
License
Copyright date
Distributor
Related resources
Contributor
Abstract
Although researchers have documented many instances of crowd wisdom, it is important to know whether some kinds of judgments may lead the crowd astray, whether crowds’ judgments improve with feedback over time, and whether crowds’ judgments can be improved by changing the way judgments are elicited. We investigated these questions in a sports gambling context (predictions against point spreads) believed to elicit crowd wisdom. In a season-long experiment, fans wagered over $20,000 on NFL football predictions. Contrary to the wisdom-of-crowds hypothesis, faulty intuitions led the crowd to predict “favorites” more than “underdogs” against point spreads that disadvantaged favorites, even when bettors knew that the spreads disadvantaged favorites. Moreover, the bias increased over time, a result consistent with attributions for success and failure that rewarded intuitive choosing. However, when the crowd predicted game outcomes by estimating point differentials rather than by predicting against point spreads, its predictions were unbiased and wiser.
Advisor
Date Range for Data Collection (Start Date)
Date Range for Data Collection (End Date)
Digital Object Identifier
Series name and number
Publication date
Journal title
Volume number
Issue number
Publisher
Publisher DOI
Comments
At the time of publication, author Joseph P. Simmons was affiliated with the Yale university. Currently (July 2016), he is a faculty member in the Operation, Information and Decision Department of the Wharton School at the University of Pennsylvania.

