Role thinking: Standing in other people’s shoes to forecast decisions in conflicts

Green, Kesten C. and Armstrong, J. Scott (2009): Role thinking: Standing in other people’s shoes to forecast decisions in conflicts.

Abstract

Better forecasts of decisions in conflict situations, such as occur in business, politics, and war, can help protagonists achieve better outcomes. It is common advice to “stand in the other person’s shoes” when involved in a conflict, a procedure we refer to as “role thinking.” We tested this advice in order to assess the extent to which it can improve accuracy. Improvement in accuracy is important because prior research found that unaided judgment produced forecasts that were little better than guessing. We obtained 101 role-thinking forecasts from 27 Naval postgraduate students (experts) and 107 role-thinking forecasts from 103 second-year organizational behavior students (novices) of the decisions that would be made in nine diverse conflicts. The accuracy of the forecasts from the novices was 33% and of those from the experts 31%. The accuracy of the role-thinking forecasts was little different from chance, which was 28%. In contrast, when we asked groups of participants to each act as if they were in the shoes one of the protagonists, accuracy was 60%.

• Item Type: MPRA Paper
• Language: English
• Keywords: combining; group decision-making; simulated interaction; unaided judgment
• Subjects: D - Microeconomics > D8 - Information, Knowledge, and Uncertainty > D81 - Criteria for Decision-Making under Risk and Uncertainty; C - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods > C5 - Econometric Modeling > C53 - Forecasting and Prediction Methods ; Simulation Methods; D - Microeconomics > D7 - Analysis of Collective Decision-Making; Q - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics ; Environmental and Ecological Economics > Q3 - Nonrenewable Resources and Conservation > Q34 - Natural Resources and Domestic and International Conflicts; F - International Economics > F5 - International Relations, National Security, and International Political Economy > F51 - International Conflicts ; Negotiations ; Sanctions; M - Business Administration and Business Economics ; Marketing ; Accounting ; Personnel Economics > M5 - Personnel Economics > M51 - Firm Employment Decisions ; Promotions

References

Armstrong, J. S. (2001), Principles of Forecasting. Boston, MA: Kluwer Academic Publishers.

Green, K. C. (2002). Forecasting decisions in conflict situations: a comparison of game theory, role-playing, and unaided judgement. International Journal of Forecasting, 18, 321-344.

Green, K. C. (2005). Game theory, simulated interaction, and unaided judgment for forecasting decisions in conflicts: Further evidence. International Journal of Forecasting, 21, 463-472.

Green, K. C. & Armstrong, J. S. (2007). The value of expertise for forecasting decisions in conflicts. Interfaces, 37(3), 287-299.

Morris, E. (2003). The Fog of War (documentary film). Culver City, CA: Sony Pictures Classics.