Judgment Analysis: Procedures*

JudgriieriL analysis (JA), also known as "policy capturing", is a research method that has been used in hundreds of studies of judgiiient and decision making including studies of multiple cue probability learning, interpersonal learning, conflict , and expert judgment. It has been found useful as an aid to judgment, particularly in cases involving conflict about technical and political issues (Hammond, et al. 1984; Hammond & Adelman, 1976). JA externalizes judgment policy by using statistical methods to derive algebraic models of the judgment process. The goal of JA is to describe, quantitatively , the relations between someone's judgment and the information, or "cues", used to make that judgment. This chapter is intended to serve as an introduction to JA f o r people who are not trained in judgment and decision research or in psychological measurement but who do have some knowledge of research methods and statistics. It will bc assumed that the reader is familiar with Social JudgmenL Theory (which provides the theoretical foundation f o r JA) and has a potential application of JA in mind. The reader who is not familiar with multiple regression analysis will f i i i d some parts of this paper rough going and will probably require statistical help in applying judgment analysis. 'I'tic? chapter will describe the steps necessary to apply JA and provide guidelines for making the numerous decisions

[1]  J. Elashoff,et al.  Multiple Regression in Behavioral Research. , 1974 .

[2]  R. Dawes,et al.  Linear models in decision making. , 1974 .

[3]  Lewis R. Goldberg,et al.  Five models of clinical judgment: An empirical comparison between linear and nonlinear representations of the human inference process , 1971 .

[4]  Kenneth R. Hammond,et al.  Improving Scientists’ Judgments of Risk , 1984 .

[5]  Paul Miesing,et al.  JUDGMENT POLICIES USED IN ASSESSING ENTERPRISE‐ZONE ECONOMIC SUCCESS CRITERIA* , 1986 .

[6]  L. Tucker.  A SUGGESTED ALTERNATIVE FORMULATION IN THE DEVELOPMENTS BY HURSCH, HAMMOND, AND HURSCH, AND BY HAMMOND, HURSCH, AND TODD. , 1964, Psychological review.

[7]  Thomas,et al.  RANGE SENSITIVITY : A NECESSARY CONDITION AND A mST FOR THE VALIDITY OF WEIGHTS , 1984 .

[8]  C. Joyce,et al.  Clinical judgment in rheumatoid arthritis. III. British rheumatologists' judgments of 'change in response to therapy'. , 1984, Annals of the rheumatic diseases.

[9]  R. Primack,et al.  Measuring the relative importance of different pollinators to plants , 1975, Nature.

[10]  W. Edwards,et al.  MULTIATTRIBUTE EVALUATION , 2003 .

[11]  R. Darlington,et al.  Multiple regression in psychological research and practice. , 1968, Psychological bulletin.

[12]  Norman H. Anderson,et al.  Methods of information integration theory , 1982 .

[13]  N. John CastellanJr.,et al.  Comments on the “lens model” equation and the analysis of multiple-cue judgment tasks , 1973 .

[14]  H. J. Einhorn.  The use of nonlinear, noncompensatory models in decision making. , 1970, Psychological bulletin.

[15]  Vithala R. Rao,et al.  Conjoint Measurement- for Quantifying Judgmental Data , 1971 .

[16]  K. R. Hammond,et al.  Science, values, and human judgment. , 1976, Science.

[17]  P. Lovie,et al.  The flat maximum effect and linear scoring models for prediction , 1986 .

[18]  L. J. Chapman,et al.  Illusory correlation as an obstacle to the use of valid psychodiagnostic signs. , 1969, Journal of abnormal psychology.

[19]  N. Pennington,et al.  Human judgment and decision making: Theories, methods, and procedures , 1980 .