Choosing the Devil You Don't Know: Evidence for Limited Sensitivity to Sample Size-Based Uncertainty When It Offers an Advantage

Many decision makers seek to optimize choices between uncertain options such as strategies, employees, or products. When performance targets must be met, attending to observed past performance is not enough to optimize choices—option uncertainty must also be considered. For example, for stretch targets that exceed observed performance, more uncertain options are often better bets. A significant determinant of option uncertainty is sample size: for a given option, the smaller the sample of information we have about it, the greater the uncertainty. In two studies, choices were made between pairs of uncertain options with the goal of exceeding a specified performance target. Information about the options differed in the size of the sample drawn from them, sample size, and the observed performance of those samples, the proportion of successes or “hits” in the sample. We found people to be sensitive to sample size–based uncertainty only when differences in observed performance were negligible. We conclude that...

[1]  W. Edwards,et al.  Sampling distributions and probability revisions. , 1968, Journal of experimental psychology.

[2]  J. March,et al.  Managerial perspectives on risk and risk taking , 1987 .

[3]  A. Dixit,et al.  Thinking Strategically: The Competitive Edge in Business, Politics, and Everyday Life , 1991 .

[4]  Daniel Read,et al.  JFQ volume 51 Issue 6 Cover and Back matter , 2016, Journal of Financial and Quantitative Analysis.

[5]  Dana L. Chesney,et al.  Sample representativeness affects whether judgments are influenced by base rate or sample size. , 2013, Acta psychologica.

[6]  Bing Sung TRANSLATIONS FROM JAMES BERNOULLI. , 1966 .

[7]  Rakesh K. Sarin,et al.  Modeling Ambiguity in Decisions Under Uncertainty , 1988 .

[8]  A. Tversky,et al.  Prospect theory: analysis of decision under risk , 1979 .

[9]  H. Thomas,et al.  Attitudes Toward Risk and The Risk–Return Paradox: Prospect Theory Explanations , 1988 .

[10]  Y. Kareev Seven (indeed, plus or minus two) and the detection of correlations. , 2000, Psychological review.

[11]  H. Thomas,et al.  Risk-attitudes and the risk return paradox : prospect theory explanations , 1985 .

[12]  Rochel Gelman,et al.  Intuitivet tests: Lay use of statistical information , 2007, Psychonomic bulletin & review.

[13]  Gerd Gigerenzer,et al.  Intuitions About Sample Size: The Empirical Law of Large Numbers , 1997 .

[14]  Shawn P. Curley,et al.  An empirical evaluation of descriptive models of ambiguity reactions in choice situations , 1989 .

[15]  Maya Bar-Hillel,et al.  The role of sample size in sample evaluation , 1979 .

[16]  D. Ariely,et al.  Less is more: the lure of ambiguity, or why familiarity breeds contempt. , 2007, Journal of personality and social psychology.

[17]  F. W. Irwin,et al.  Tests of two theories of decision in an expanded judgment situation. , 1956, Journal of experimental psychology.

[18]  R. Koenker,et al.  Uncertainty, Hiring and Subsequent Performance: The NFL Draft , 2003 .

[19]  Daniel Read,et al.  Choosing the devil you don’t know , 2016 .

[20]  A. E. Dusoir,et al.  Proportionality and sample size as factors in intuitive statistical judgement , 1977 .

[21]  L. Cosmides,et al.  When and why do people avoid unknown probabilities in decisions under uncertainty? Testing some predictions from optimal foraging theory , 1999, Cognition.

[22]  R. Hogarth,et al.  Venture Theory: A Model of Decision Weights , 1990 .

[23]  Christopher R. Bollinger,et al.  The Upside Potential of Hiring Risky Workers: Evidence from the Baseball Industry , 2003, Journal of Labor Economics.

[24]  A. Tversky,et al.  Prospect theory: an analysis of decision under risk — Source link , 2007 .

[25]  E. Brunswik Representative design and probabilistic theory in a functional psychology. , 1955, Psychological review.

[26]  D. Ellsberg Decision, probability, and utility: Risk, ambiguity, and the Savage axioms , 1961 .

[27]  John W. Payne,et al.  Translation of Gambles and Aspiration Level Effects in Risky Choice Behavior , 1980 .

[28]  A. Kacelnik,et al.  Risky Theories—The Effects of Variance on Foraging Decisions , 1996 .

[29]  Shawn P. Curley,et al.  The center and range of the probability interval as factors affecting ambiguity preferences , 1985 .

[30]  Janis E. Jacobs,et al.  Children's use of sample size and variability to make social inferences , 2001 .

[31]  Richard P. Larrick,et al.  Goals as Reference Points , 1999, Cognitive Psychology.

[32]  Bradley J. Morris,et al.  Investigating the development of data evaluation: the role of data characteristics. , 2008, Child development.

[33]  H. Simon,et al.  A Behavioral Model of Rational Choice , 1955 .

[34]  Sorel Cahan Decision quality (always) increases with the size of information samples-provided that the decision rule is statistically valid: comment on Fiedler and Kareev (2006). , 2010, Journal of experimental psychology. Learning, memory, and cognition.

[35]  Yaakov Kareev,et al.  Choosing Between Adaptive Agents , 2007, Psychological science.

[36]  K. Fiedler,et al.  Does decision quality (always) increase with the size of information samples? Some vicissitudes in applying the law of large numbers. , 2006, Journal of experimental psychology. Learning, memory, and cognition.

[37]  Dennis Kundisch,et al.  Goals as Reference Points: Empirical Evidence from a Virtual Reward System , 2016, Decis. Anal..

[38]  Roy L. Crum,et al.  Managerial Risk Preferences for Below-Target Returns , 1980 .

[39]  D. Bernoulli Exposition of a New Theory on the Measurement of Risk , 1954 .

[40]  Edward P. Lazear Hiring Risky Workers , 1995 .

[41]  Simon Burgess,et al.  Hiring Risky Workers: Some Evidence , 1998 .

[42]  P. Fishburn Mean-Risk Analysis with Risk Associated with Below-Target Returns , 1977 .

[43]  A. Tversky,et al.  The weighing of evidence and the determinants of confidence , 1992, Cognitive Psychology.

[44]  H. Markowitz The Utility of Wealth , 1952, Journal of Political Economy.

[45]  Lola L. Lopes Decision Making in the Short Run. , 1981 .