Academic Journal
The Pick-the-Winner-Picker Heuristic: Preference for Categorically Correct Forecasts.
| Τίτλος: | The Pick-the-Winner-Picker Heuristic: Preference for Categorically Correct Forecasts. |
|---|---|
| Συγγραφείς: | Naborn, Jay (AUTHOR) j.naborn@wustl.edu, Bogard, Jonathan E. (AUTHOR) |
| Πηγή: | Journal of Marketing Research (JMR). Oct2026, Vol. 63 Issue 5, p876-894. 19p. |
| Θεματικοί όροι: | *Forecasting, *Heuristic, Uncertainty, Winners, Judgment (Psychology) |
| Περίληψη: | People routinely make decisions based on predictions made by others (e.g., political pundits, market analysts), so it is in their best interest to identify high-quality forecasts. Experts characterize good forecasting as minimization of continuous error (i.e., predictions close to the eventual outcome). By contrast, the present work reveals that laypeople typically see good forecasts as those that correctly predict an event's categorical outcome (e.g., the winning team). Using within-subjects, between-subjects, and incentive-compatible designs, 15 studies demonstrate this "pick-the-winner-picker heuristic" as well as its psychological mechanism: People evaluate forecasts by assigning separate weights to (1) categorical correctness and (2) continuous error minimization, depending on the overall importance of the categorical and continuous dimensions for that situation. Thus, in the common case when the categorical dimension matters most (e.g., sports contests), people prize forecasts that accurately predicted the categorical outcome (e.g., the winner, not the margin of victory). However, when the categorical dimension's stakes are experimentally reduced, an attenuation is observed. Although this describes how people typically evaluate forecasts, crucially, a dimension's importance is not necessarily related to its diagnosticity of forecaster skill or reliability. Accordingly, the pick-the-winner-picker heuristic may constitute a normative mistake, while framing manipulations help debias judgments. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR] |
| Copyright of Journal of Marketing Research (JMR) is the property of American Marketing Association and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites without the copyright holder's express written permission. Additionally, content may not be used with any artificial intelligence tools or machine learning technologies. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.) | |
| Βάση Δεδομένων: | Business Source Index |
| FullText | Text: Availability: 0 CustomLinks: – Url: http://www.jstor.org/openurl?issn=00222437&date=2026&volume=63&issue=5&spage=876 Name: JSTOR (all content) (s7799221) Category: fullText Text: Icon: https://imageserver.ebscohost.com/branding/jstor/iconJSTOR.gif MouseOverText: Full Text from JSTOR |
|---|---|
| Header | DbId: bsx DbLabel: Business Source Index An: 196514399 RelevancyScore: 1515 AccessLevel: 6 PubType: Academic Journal PubTypeId: academicJournal PreciseRelevancyScore: 1515 |
| IllustrationInfo | |
| Items | – Name: Title Label: Title Group: Ti Data: The Pick-the-Winner-Picker Heuristic: Preference for Categorically Correct Forecasts. – Name: Author Label: Authors Group: Au Data: <searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Naborn%2C+Jay%22">Naborn, Jay</searchLink> (AUTHOR)<i> j.naborn@wustl.edu</i><br /><searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Bogard%2C+Jonathan+E%2E%22">Bogard, Jonathan E.</searchLink> (AUTHOR) – Name: TitleSource Label: Source Group: Src Data: <searchLink fieldCode="JN" term="%22Journal+of+Marketing+Research+%28JMR%29%22">Journal of Marketing Research (JMR)</searchLink>. Oct2026, Vol. 63 Issue 5, p876-894. 19p. – Name: Subject Label: Subject Terms Group: Su Data: *<searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Forecasting%22">Forecasting</searchLink><br />*<searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Heuristic%22">Heuristic</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Uncertainty%22">Uncertainty</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Winners%22">Winners</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Judgment+%28Psychology%29%22">Judgment (Psychology)</searchLink> – Name: Abstract Label: Abstract Group: Ab Data: People routinely make decisions based on predictions made by others (e.g., political pundits, market analysts), so it is in their best interest to identify high-quality forecasts. Experts characterize good forecasting as minimization of continuous error (i.e., predictions close to the eventual outcome). By contrast, the present work reveals that laypeople typically see good forecasts as those that correctly predict an event's categorical outcome (e.g., the winning team). Using within-subjects, between-subjects, and incentive-compatible designs, 15 studies demonstrate this "pick-the-winner-picker heuristic" as well as its psychological mechanism: People evaluate forecasts by assigning separate weights to (1) categorical correctness and (2) continuous error minimization, depending on the overall importance of the categorical and continuous dimensions for that situation. Thus, in the common case when the categorical dimension matters most (e.g., sports contests), people prize forecasts that accurately predicted the categorical outcome (e.g., the winner, not the margin of victory). However, when the categorical dimension's stakes are experimentally reduced, an attenuation is observed. Although this describes how people typically evaluate forecasts, crucially, a dimension's importance is not necessarily related to its diagnosticity of forecaster skill or reliability. Accordingly, the pick-the-winner-picker heuristic may constitute a normative mistake, while framing manipulations help debias judgments. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR] – Name: AbstractSuppliedCopyright Label: Group: Ab Data: <i>Copyright of Journal of Marketing Research (JMR) is the property of American Marketing Association and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites without the copyright holder's express written permission. Additionally, content may not be used with any artificial intelligence tools or machine learning technologies. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract.</i> (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.) |
| PLink | https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&site=eds-live&db=bsx&AN=196514399 |
| RecordInfo | BibRecord: BibEntity: Identifiers: – Type: doi Value: 10.1177/00222437251381209 Languages: – Code: eng Text: English PhysicalDescription: Pagination: PageCount: 19 StartPage: 876 Subjects: – SubjectFull: Forecasting Type: general – SubjectFull: Heuristic Type: general – SubjectFull: Uncertainty Type: general – SubjectFull: Winners Type: general – SubjectFull: Judgment (Psychology) Type: general Titles: – TitleFull: The Pick-the-Winner-Picker Heuristic: Preference for Categorically Correct Forecasts. Type: main BibRelationships: HasContributorRelationships: – PersonEntity: Name: NameFull: Naborn, Jay – PersonEntity: Name: NameFull: Bogard, Jonathan E. IsPartOfRelationships: – BibEntity: Dates: – D: 01 M: 10 Text: Oct2026 Type: published Y: 2026 Identifiers: – Type: issn-print Value: 00222437 Numbering: – Type: volume Value: 63 – Type: issue Value: 5 Titles: – TitleFull: Journal of Marketing Research (JMR) Type: main |
| ResultId | 1 |