SRA-E Lisbon 2017

Forecasting market potential is a crucial for a company’s strategic focus. Such forecasting processes often involve several sources of information which a group of experts has to judge and from which they have to derive appropriate estimations. However, such estimations can be biased in that irrelevant situational factors (subconsciously) affect expert’s judgments. One of the most prominent and robust biasing effect in psychological decision making and risk research is that of anchoring: people adjust an estimation to an (irrelevant) number, i.e., anchor. With respect to market forecasts in banking, this effect is of special relevance, since all facts and key information are depicted in numbers. The present study was based on forecast processes in a regional bank and transferred to a laboratory setting with a student population (N = 184). It examined the influence of two sequential anchors on performance judgments and actual performance. In addition, the source of information (i.e., an expert judgment vs. a computer model forecast) was varied and trustworthiness and credibility were measured. Results indicate that anchoring occurred after the first anchor. If anchors provided congruent information (high/high or low/low), judgements remained stable. However, if anchors provided incongruent information (high/low or low/high), anchoring effects diminished. Furthermore, no effects of source of information and no effects on actual performance were found. Practical implications can be drawn for the design of estimation processes in particular and risk management in general.