Realism in Confidence Judgments as a Function of Working in Dyads or Alone

摘要: This study compares the realism of confidence judgments made by individuals and pairs their answers to general knowledge questions, using a within-subjects design. In initial Control condition, subjects first answered 30 questions then rated chosen answer. For next (Condition 2), they wrote down an argument for answer confidence-rated third 40 were divided into 20 who same as in Condition 2. Pair members asked collaborate on all parts task. The results showed that overconfidence decreased condition compared with Single conditions. Analysis interaction higher those instances where one pair member dominated totally. Other analyses also supported importance argumentation between realistic judgments. A comparison previous research suggests fact attempted individually may have increased proportion correct limited increase condition. control study, checking effect answering twice, found no repetition any three calibration measures used.