Skip to main content

Der Einfluss verzerrter Selbsteinschätzung auf die Qualität von Prognosen

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
  • 3302 Accesses

Zusammenfassung

Diese Studie untersucht den Einfluss verzerrter Selbsteinschätzungen von Entscheidern auf die (relative) Qualität ihrer Prognosen. Der Fokus der Studie liegt auf dem Better-Than-Average-Effekt (BTA-Effekt) als Ursache für verzerrte Selbsteinschätzungen. Mittels eines Labor-Experimentes wird insbesondere untersucht, wie sich der BTA-Effekt auf die Anpassung einmal getätigter Prognosen an neue Informationen auswirkt. Im Experiment geben Teilnehmer eine anfängliche Prognose ab und erhalten daraufhin entscheidungsrelevante Informationen, um ihre Prognose entsprechend anzupassen. Wir stellen die Hypothesen auf, dass verzerrte Selbsteinschätzungen im Sinne des BTA-Effektes zwar keinen Einfluss auf die anfängliche Prognosequalität haben, dass sie sich jedoch negativ auf angepasste Prognosen auswirken, da sie die Anpassungsstärke an neue Informationen beeinflussen. Die Ergebnisse der Studie unterstützen die aufgestellten Hypothesen. Im Einklang mit bisherigen Studien finden wir keinen systematischen Zusammenhang der Selbsteinschätzung mit der Prognosequalität. Die Ergebnisse zeigen aber einen negativen Einfluss einer Selbstüberschätzung auf die Anpassungsstärke und auch auf die durchschnittliche Qualität der angepassten Prognosen. Wir folgern, dass eine verzerrte Selbsteinschätzung der Prognosequalität negative ökonomische Folgen bei der Revision von Prognosen nach sich ziehen kann. Die Studie kommt damit u. a. dem Appell von Dunning et al. (Psychol Sci Pub Interest 5(3):69–106, 2004) nach, die praktischen Konsequenzen einer verzerrten Selbsteinschätzung in den Fokus zu stellen.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.

Buying options

Chapter
USD   29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD   49.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD   49.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Learn about institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. 1.

    Die Statistik beruht auf einer Stichprobe von 558 nordamerikanischen Unternehmen. Befragt wurden Manager aus mittleren bis großen Unternehmen, die entweder der CMA (Certified Management Accountants of Canada) oder der IMA (Institute of Management Accountants) angehören.

  2. 2.

    In der Forecasting-Literatur werden diese Ansätze in der Regel als Supra Bayesian bezeichnet (vgl. z. B. Jacobs 1995).

  3. 3.

    Für eine Übersicht über deskriptive Modelle der Anpassung von Prognosen vgl. z. B. Krishnamoorthy et al. 1999.

  4. 4.

    Bei der Abgabe von frei wählbaren Schätzwerten wie in dieser Studie unterliegen die Daten u. U. großen Schwankungen. Insbesondere die Extremwerte können die Analyse erheblich beeinträchtigen, weswegen diese in der Regel ausgeschlossen werden (vgl. dazu auch Müller und Weber 2010). Für alle folgenden Analysen wurden auch hier Schätzungen, die um mehr als die dreifache Standardabweichung von der mittleren Schätzung abweichen, ausgeschlossen.

Literatur

  • Alicke MD (1985) Global self-evaluation as determined by the desirability and controllability of trait adjectives. J Personal Soc Psychol 49(6):1621–1630

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Alicke MD, Govorun O (2005) The better-than-average effect. In: Alicke MD, Dunning DA, Krueger JI (Hrsg) The self in social judgment. Studies in self and identity. Psychology Press, New York:85–106

    Google Scholar 

  • Arkes HR, Christensen C, Lai C, Blumer C (1987) Two methods of reducing overconfidence. Organ Behav Hum Decis Process 39(1):133–144

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Baker HK, Nofsinger JR (2002) Psychological biases of investors. Financ Serv Rev 11(2):97–116

    Google Scholar 

  • Bamber EM, Ramsay RJ, Tubbs RM (1997) An examination of the descriptive validity of the belief-adjustment model and alternative attitudes to evidence in auditing. Account Organ Soc 22(3):249–268

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Barber BM, Odean T (2000) Trading is hazardous to your wealth: the common stock investment performance of individual investors. J Financ 55(2):773–806

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bates JM, Granger, CW (1969) The combination of forecasts. J Op Res Soc 20(4):451–468

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Berry AJ, Broadbent J, Otley DT (Hrsg) (2005) Management control: theories, issues and performance. Palgrave Macmillan, Basingstoke

    Google Scholar 

  • Bonaccio S, Van Swol L (2013) Combining Information and Judgments. In: Highhouse S, Dalal RS, Salas E (Hrsg) Judgment and decision-making at work. SIOP Frontiers Series, Routledge

    Google Scholar 

  • Brown JD (2007) The self. Psychology Press, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Brown JD (2012) Understanding the better than average effect motives (still) matter. Personal Soc Psychol Bull 38(2):209–219

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chambers JR, Suls J (2007) The role of egocentrism and focalism in the emotion intensity bias. J Exp Soc Psychol 43(4):618–625

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chambers JR, Windschitl PD (2004) Biases in social comparative judgments: the role of nonmotivated factors in above-average and comparative-optimism effects. Psychol Bull 130(5):813

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chemers MM, Hu L, Garcia BF (2001) Academic self-efficacy and first-year college student performance and adjustment. J Educ Psychol 93:55–64

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Colvin CR, Block J (1994) Do positive illusions foster mental health? An examination of the Taylor and Brown formulation. Psychol Bull 116(1):3–20

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cooper AC, Woo CY, Dunkelberg WC (1988) Entrepreneurs’ perceived chances for success. J Bus Ventur 3(2):97–108

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cross KP (1977) Not can, but will college teaching be improved? New Dir Higher Educ 1977(17):1–15

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dunning D, Heath C, Suls JM (2004) Flawed self-assessment implications for health, education, and the workplace. Psychol Sci Pub Interest 5(3):69–106

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fagerlin A, Zikmund-Fisher BJ, Ubel PA (2007) “If I’m better than average, then I’m ok?”: comparative information influences beliefs about risk and benefits. Patient Educ Couns 69(1):140–144

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Farrow, M (1998) Bayes linear networks and nonlinearities. International Bayesian conference, Valencia meeting:1–9

    Google Scholar 

  • Greiner B (2004) An online recruitment system for economic experiments. Forschung und wissenschaftliches Rechnen 2003. GWDG Bericht 63:79–93

    Google Scholar 

  • Guenther CL, Alicke MD (2010) Deconstructing the better-than-average effect. J Personal Soc psychol 99(5):755–770

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hansen SC, van der Stede WA (2004) Multiple facets of budgeting: an exploratory analysis. Manage Account Res 15(4):415–439

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hansford BC, Hattie JA (1982) The relationship between self and achievement/performance measures. Rev Educ Res 52(1):123–142

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hartmann FG (2000) The appropriateness of RAPM: toward the further development of theory. Account Organ Soc 25(4):451–482

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hendriks A (2012) SoPHIE – software platform for human interaction experiments. University of Osnabrück, Osnabrück

    Google Scholar 

  • Hogarth RM, Einhorn HJ (1992) Order effects in belief updating: the belief-adjustment model. Cognit Psychol 24(1):1–55

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jacobs RA (1995) Methods for combining experts’ probability assessments. Neural Comput 7(5):867–888

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kahle J, Pinsker R, Pennington R (2005) Belief revision in accounting: a literature review of the belief-adjustment model. Adv Account Behav Res 8:1–40

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kanten AB, Teigen KH (2008) Better than average and better with time: relative evaluations of self and others in the past, present, and future. Eur J Soc Psychol 38:343–353. doi:10.1002/ejsp.457

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kaplan SN, Klebanov MM, Sorensen M (2012) Which CEO characteristics and abilities matter? J Financ 67(3):973–1007

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Klar Y, Giladi EE (1999) Are most people happier than their peers, or are they just happy? Personal Soc Psychol Bull 25(5):586–595

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Krishnamoorthy G, Mock TJ, Washington MT (1999) A comparative evaluation of belief revision models in auditing. Audit J Pract Theory 18(2):105–127

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kruger J (1999) Lake Wobegon be gone! The „below-average effect“ and the egocentric nature of comparative ability judgments. J Personal Soc Psychol 77(2):221

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kruger J, Burrus J (2004). Egocentrism and focalism in unrealistic optimism (and pessimism). J Exp Soc Psychol 40(3):332–340

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kruglanski AW (1996) Motivated social cognition: principles of the interface. In: Higgins ET, Kruglanski AW (Hrsg) Social psychology: a handbook of basic principles. Guilford, New York:493–522

    Google Scholar 

  • Larrick RP, Burson KA, Soll JB (2007) Social comparison and confidence: when thinking you’re better than average predicts overconfidence (and when it does not). Organ Behav Hum Decis Process 102(1):76–94

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Libby T, Lindsay RM (2010) Beyond budgeting or budgeting reconsidered? A survey of North-American budgeting practice. Manage Account Res 21(1):56–75

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Makridakis S, Wheelwright SC, Hyndman RJ (1998) Forecasting: methods and applications. Wiley, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • McCarthy TM, Davis DF, Golicic SL, Mentzer JT (2006) The evolution of sales forecasting management: a 20⣳year longitudinal study of forecasting practices. J Forecast 25(5):303–324

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McVay GJ, Sauers DA, Clark MW (2008) Belief adjustment in the budgeting process: examining the contextual validity of the belief-adjustment model. Acad Account Financ Stud J 12(2): 131–139

    Google Scholar 

  • Mentzer JT, Cox JE (1984) Familiarity, application, and performance of sales forecasting techniques. J Forecast 3(1):27–36

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mentzer JT, Kahn KB (1995) Forecasting technique familiarity, satisfaction, usage, and application. J Forecast 14(5):465–476

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Moon MA, Mentzer JT, Smith CD (2003) Conducting a sales forecasting audit. Int J Forecast 19(1):5–25

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Moore DA, Healy PJ (2008) The trouble with overconfidence. Psychol Rev 115(2):502

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Moore DA, Small DA (2007) Error and bias in comparative judgment: on being both better and worse than we think we are. J Personal Soc Psychol 92(6):972–982

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Müller S, Weber M (2010) Financial literacy and mutual fund investments: who buys actively managed funds? Schmalenbach Bus Rev (sbr) 62(2):126–153

    Google Scholar 

  • Perloff LS, Fetzer, BK (1986) Self–other judgments and perceived vulnerability to victimization. J Personal Soc Psychol 50(3):502–510

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pratt JW, Raiffa H, Schlaifer R (1995) Introduction to statistical decision theory. MIT Press, Cambridge

    Google Scholar 

  • Pronin E, Lin DY, Ross L (2002) The bias blind spot: perceptions of bias in self versus others. Personal Soc Psychol Bull 28(3):369–381

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pulford BD, Colman AM (1997) Overconfidence: feedback and item difficulty effects. Personal Individ Differ 23(1):125–133

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schmidgall RS, Borchgrevink CP, Zahl-Begnum OH (1996) Operations budgeting practices of lodging firms in the United States and Scandinavia. Int J Hosp Manage 15(2):189–203

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sedikides C, Herbst KC, Hardin DP, Dardis GJ (2002) Accountability as a deterrent to selfenhancement: the search for mechanisms. J Personal Soc Psychol 83(3):592

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shim JK (2000) Strategic business forecasting: the complete guide to forecasting real world company performance. CRC Press, Boca Raton

    Google Scholar 

  • Stajkovic AD, Luthans F (1998) Self-efficacy and work-related performance: a meta-analysis. Psychol Bull 124(2):240–261

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Svenson O (1981) Are we all less risky and more skillful than our fellow drivers? Acta Psychol 47(2):143–148

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Taylor SE, Brown JD (1988) Illusion and well-being: a social psycho-logical perspective on mental health. Psychol Bull 103:193–210

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Taylor SE, Lerner JS, Sherman DK, Sage RM, McDowell NK (2003) Portrait of the self-enhancer: well adjusted and well liked or maladjusted and friendless? J Personal Soc Psychol 84(1):165–176

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Thiele J (1993) Kombination von Prognosen. Physica-Verlag, Heidelberg

    Google Scholar 

  • Tversky A, Kahneman D (1974) Judgment under uncertainty: heuristics and biases. Science 185(4157):1124–1131

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Welge MK, Al-Laham A (2008) Strategisches Management: Grundlagen–Prozess–Implementierung. Gabler, Wiesbaden

    Google Scholar 

  • Wild J (1982) Grundlagen der Unternehmungsplanung. Westdeutscher, Wiesbaden

    Google Scholar 

  • de With E, Dijkman A (2008) Budgeting practises of listed companies in the Netherlands. Manage Account Q 10(1):26–36

    Google Scholar 

  • Zell E, Krizan Z (2014) Do people have insight into their abilities? A metasynthesis. Perspect Psychol Sci 9(2):111–125

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Sebastian Robert .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2015 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Robert, S., Hendriks, A. (2015). Der Einfluss verzerrter Selbsteinschätzung auf die Qualität von Prognosen. In: Schenk-Mathes, H., Köster, C. (eds) Entscheidungstheorie und –praxis. Springer Gabler, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-662-46611-7_5

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-662-46611-7_5

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer Gabler, Berlin, Heidelberg

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-662-46610-0

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-662-46611-7

  • eBook Packages: Business and Economics (German Language)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics