“we don′t expect it happened”

On mazursky and ofir′s (1990) purported reversal of the hindsight bias

Melvin Michael Mark, Steven Mellor

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

17 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Mazursky and Ofir (1990) recently claimed to have shown a reversal of the hindsight bias. They presented three experiments which supposedly showed that, following unexpected and surprising events, judgments were biased in a direction opposite to that predicted by the hindsight bias. We argue that the Mazursky and Ofir results should not be interpreted as a reversal of the hindsight bias for three reasons: (1) Mazursky and Ofir′s supposed reversal effect is on a rating of the quality of a product, rather than on the sort of likelihood ratings on which the hindsight bias has been demonstrated; (2) their results can readily be interpreted in terms of a contrast effect, especially in the case of their Experiments 1 and 2; and (3) given the use of quality ratings, the supposed reversal effect could have resulted from subjects′ desire to rate one product as superior, in part by rating other similar products as inferior. Discussion focuses on other purported evidence for a reversal of the hindsight effect and on suggestions for future research.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)247-252
Number of pages6
JournalOrganizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes
Volume57
Issue number2
DOIs
StatePublished - Jan 1 1994

Fingerprint

Hindsight bias
Reversal
Direction compound
Rating
Experiment

All Science Journal Classification (ASJC) codes

  • Applied Psychology
  • Organizational Behavior and Human Resource Management

Cite this

@article{f67d308dbec04479a2e067f8a2f2188f,
title = "“we don′t expect it happened”: On mazursky and ofir′s (1990) purported reversal of the hindsight bias",
abstract = "Mazursky and Ofir (1990) recently claimed to have shown a reversal of the hindsight bias. They presented three experiments which supposedly showed that, following unexpected and surprising events, judgments were biased in a direction opposite to that predicted by the hindsight bias. We argue that the Mazursky and Ofir results should not be interpreted as a reversal of the hindsight bias for three reasons: (1) Mazursky and Ofir′s supposed reversal effect is on a rating of the quality of a product, rather than on the sort of likelihood ratings on which the hindsight bias has been demonstrated; (2) their results can readily be interpreted in terms of a contrast effect, especially in the case of their Experiments 1 and 2; and (3) given the use of quality ratings, the supposed reversal effect could have resulted from subjects′ desire to rate one product as superior, in part by rating other similar products as inferior. Discussion focuses on other purported evidence for a reversal of the hindsight effect and on suggestions for future research.",
author = "Mark, {Melvin Michael} and Steven Mellor",
year = "1994",
month = "1",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1006/obhd.1994.1014",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "57",
pages = "247--252",
journal = "Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes",
issn = "0749-5978",
publisher = "Academic Press Inc.",
number = "2",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - “we don′t expect it happened”

T2 - On mazursky and ofir′s (1990) purported reversal of the hindsight bias

AU - Mark, Melvin Michael

AU - Mellor, Steven

PY - 1994/1/1

Y1 - 1994/1/1

N2 - Mazursky and Ofir (1990) recently claimed to have shown a reversal of the hindsight bias. They presented three experiments which supposedly showed that, following unexpected and surprising events, judgments were biased in a direction opposite to that predicted by the hindsight bias. We argue that the Mazursky and Ofir results should not be interpreted as a reversal of the hindsight bias for three reasons: (1) Mazursky and Ofir′s supposed reversal effect is on a rating of the quality of a product, rather than on the sort of likelihood ratings on which the hindsight bias has been demonstrated; (2) their results can readily be interpreted in terms of a contrast effect, especially in the case of their Experiments 1 and 2; and (3) given the use of quality ratings, the supposed reversal effect could have resulted from subjects′ desire to rate one product as superior, in part by rating other similar products as inferior. Discussion focuses on other purported evidence for a reversal of the hindsight effect and on suggestions for future research.

AB - Mazursky and Ofir (1990) recently claimed to have shown a reversal of the hindsight bias. They presented three experiments which supposedly showed that, following unexpected and surprising events, judgments were biased in a direction opposite to that predicted by the hindsight bias. We argue that the Mazursky and Ofir results should not be interpreted as a reversal of the hindsight bias for three reasons: (1) Mazursky and Ofir′s supposed reversal effect is on a rating of the quality of a product, rather than on the sort of likelihood ratings on which the hindsight bias has been demonstrated; (2) their results can readily be interpreted in terms of a contrast effect, especially in the case of their Experiments 1 and 2; and (3) given the use of quality ratings, the supposed reversal effect could have resulted from subjects′ desire to rate one product as superior, in part by rating other similar products as inferior. Discussion focuses on other purported evidence for a reversal of the hindsight effect and on suggestions for future research.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=38149145256&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=38149145256&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1006/obhd.1994.1014

DO - 10.1006/obhd.1994.1014

M3 - Article

VL - 57

SP - 247

EP - 252

JO - Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes

JF - Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes

SN - 0749-5978

IS - 2

ER -