| Autor: |
SANGHOON KANG, KIM, JERRY W. |
| Předmět: |
|
| Zdroj: |
Academy of Management Journal; Apr2022, Vol. 65 Issue 2, p577-605, 29p, 14 Charts, 7 Graphs |
| Abstrakt: |
Experts play a crucial role in modern organizations, but evidence regarding the soundness and reliability of their decision-making is mixed and often contradictory. We develop and test a moderated-mediation model of expert decision-making linking expertise, identity threat, and overprecision to understand when and why experts offer overly precise judgments, and how they can cope with disconfirming feedback. We find support for this model in a series of lab experiments which show that (a) experts are more likely than novices to double down and produce overly precise predictions following disconfirming feedback, (b) this feedback-induced overprecision by experts is mediated by perceived level of expert identity threat, (c) the source of the feedback matters for identity threat and overprecision, and (d) self-affirmation attenuates identity threat and reduces overprecision. We supplement these experimental findings by investigating experts' response to disconfirming feedback in two real-world settings: Major League Baseball umpiring and chief financial officer predictions of stock market returns. Our model and results show that feedback can harm expert decision-making by leading experts to be overly precise in their judgment, challenging existing notions on the ability of expert decision-makers, and providing insight into when and why experts should be relied upon in organizational decisions. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR] |
| Databáze: |
Complementary Index |
| Externí odkaz: |
|
