Key points are not available for this paper at this time.
This article reviews the now extensive research literature addressing the impact of accountability on a wide range of social judgments and choices. It focuses on 4 issues: (a) What impact do various accountability ground rules have on thoughts, feelings, and action? (b) Under what conditions will accountability attenuate, have no effect on, or amplify cognitive biases? (c) Does accountability alter how people think or merely what people say they think? and (d) What goals do accountable decision makers seek to achieve? In addition, this review explores the broader implications of accountability research. It highlights the utility of treating thought as a process of internalized dialogue; the importance of documenting social and institutional boundary conditions on putative cognitive biases; and the potential to craft empirical answers to such applied problems as how to structure accountability relationships in organizations.
Building similarity graph...
Analyzing shared references across papers
Loading...
Jennifer S. Lerner
John F. Kennedy University
Philip E. Tetlock
California University of Pennsylvania
Psychological Bulletin
Carnegie Mellon University
Decision Sciences (United States)
Building similarity graph...
Analyzing shared references across papers
Loading...
Lerner et al. (Fri,) studied this question.
synapsesocial.com/papers/69d97c25387cf70698684427 — DOI: https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.125.2.255
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: