Probability judgment accuracy: China, Japan, and the United States

• Published in: Organizational behavior and human decision processes Vol. 43; no. 2; pp. 145 - 171
• Main Authors: Yates, J.Frank, Zhu, Ying, Ronis, David L, Wang, Deng-Feng, Shinotsuka, Hiromi, Toda, Masanao
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: Amsterdam Elsevier Inc 01.04.1989; Elsevier; Elsevier Science Publishing Company, Inc
• Series: Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes
• Subjects: Accuracy; Behavior. Attitude; Biological and medical sciences; Fundamental and applied biological sciences. Psychology; Judgments; Mathematical analysis; Organizational behavior; Probability; Psychology. Psychoanalysis. Psychiatry; Psychology. Psychophysiology; Social psychology; Studies; Japan; China; Human; Crosscultural study; Asia; United States; Decision making; China; Japan; America; Probability; North America; Forecasting; Judgment
• ISSN: 0749-5978; 1095-9920
• DOI: 10.1016/0749-5978(89)90048-4

Subjects in China, Japan, and the United States reported probability judgments. In Study 1, Chinese and American subjects indicated degrees of certainty about their answers to general-knowledge questions with discrete alternatives, e.g., whether potatoes grow better in warm or in cool climates. In Study 2, Japanese subjects made similar discrete-alternative assessments. In Study 3, subjects in China and the United States reported probability distribution judgments for various quantities, e.g., the maximum temperature on a specified day. Judgment accuracy was evaluated overall and with respect to several underlying accuracy dimensions. The overall quality of discrete-alternative judgments was indistinguishable among the subjects from the three countries. The accuracy component patterns of the Japanese and American subjects were essentially the same. However, the Chinese subjects achieved the common overall accuracy level very differently. On some accuracy dimensions, e.g., calibration, the American and Japanese subjects' judgments were superior. On others, e.g., discrimination, the assessments of the Chinese subjects excelled. Results for quantity judgments were similar to those for discrete-alternative judgments, although there were notable differences. Potential explanations and implications are discussed.