Los puntos clave no están disponibles para este artículo en este momento.
The quality of group judgment is examined in situations in which groups have to express an opinion in quantitative form. To provide a yardstick for evaluating the quality of group performance (which is itself defined as the absolute value of the discrepancy between the judgment and the true value), four baseline models are considered. These models provide a standard for evaluating how well groups perform. The four models are: (a) randomly picking a single individual; (b) weighting the judgments of the individual group members equally (the group mean); (c) weighting the best group member (i.e., the one closest to the true value) totally where the best is known, a priori, with certainty; (d) weighting the best member totally where there is a given probability of misidentifying the best and getting the second, third, etc., best member. These four models are examined under varying conditions of group size and bias. Bias is denned as the degree to which the expectation of the population of individual judgments does not equal the true value (i.e., there is systematic bias in individual judgments). A method is then developed to evaluate
Einhorn et al. (Sat,) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: