Accountability: a social magnifier of the dilution effect.

By Philip Tetlock, R. Boettger. 1989

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

Citations in the corpus

Explanation in Artificial Intelligence: Insights from the Social Sciences (2017, background): “Tetlock and Boettger [169] investigated the effect of implicature with respect to the information presented, particularly its relevance, showing that when presented with additional, irrelevant information, people’s implicatures are diluted.”
Self-presentation style in job interviews: the role of personality and culture (2013, background): “A third contextual factor influencing choice of selfpresentation tactics is accountability, i.e., the degree to which interviewees feel responsible for the accuracy of their claims (Paulhus et al., 2003; Schlenker, Weigold, & Doherty, 1991; Tetlock & Boettger, 1989).”
In Search of Negative Customer Feedback: The Effect of Expecting to Evaluate on Satisfaction Evaluations (2001, background): “…and performance (e.g., Petty, Cacioppo, and Schumann 1983), involvement generated under common conditions, such as accountability and the need to explain, can exacerbate certain errors and biases (e.g., Simonson 1989; Simonson and Nowlis 2000; Tetlock and Boettger 1989; Wilson and Schooler 1991).”
Coping with Accountability Cross-Pressures: Low-Effort Evasive Tactics and High-Effort Quests for Complex Compromises (2000, background): “The first possibility is that people shift into a relatively mindless form of integrative complexity, as illustrated by the dilution effect (Tetlock & Boettger, 1989; Tetlock, Lerner, & Boettger, 1996).”
The Impact of "No Opinion" Response Options on Data Quality: Non-Attitude Reduction or an Invitation to Satisfice? (2001, background): “As expected, attraction to the no-opinion option was greatest among the respondents lowest in formal education, as evidenced by the significant and positive interaction between offering/omitting the no-opinion option and education shown in column 2 of table 1 ( , ).”
The case for motivated reasoning. (1990, background): “…susceptible than other subjects to the dilution effect—that is, were more likely to moderate their predictions about a target when given nondiagnostic information about that target—and this tendency appeared to have resulted from more complex processing of information (Tetlock & Boettger, 1989).”
Do key audit matters impact financial reporting behavior? (2020, unknown): “This self-critical approach to decision-making implies the consideration of multiple perspectives and an anticipation of others' potential objections to decisions (Tetlock & Boettger, 1989; Tetlock & Lerner, 1999).”
Accounting for the effects of accountability. (1999, background): “…accountable and unaccountable participants gave weight to irrelevant information contained in thumbnail sketches of students (e.g., the number of plants a student keeps), but accountable participants were even more likely to do so (Tetlock & Boettger, 1989; Tetlock , Lerner, & Boettger, 1996).”
Automation and Accountability in Decision Support System Interface Design (2006, background): “In theory, increased accountability motivates subjects to employ more self-critical and cognitively complex decision-making strategies (Tetlock & Boettger, 1989).”
Celebrity co-branding partners as irrelevant brand information in advertisements (2013, background): “Nondiagnostic, uninformative or irrelevant information presented alone results in more extreme predictions than when in combination with relevant information (Tetlock & Boettinger, 1989).”