Where experience makes a difference: teachers' judgment accuracy and diagnostic reasoning regarding student learning characteristics.

The concept of teacher professional vision suggests that experienced teachers, compared to novice teachers, might be better at making accurate judgments of students' learning characteristics, which can be explained by their advanced reasoning in diagnostic situations. This study examines experienced and novice teachers' diagnoses of different student characteristic profiles: three inconsistent profiles (overestimating, uninterested, and underestimating) and two consistent profiles (strong and struggling). We examined both experienced (n = 19 in-service mathematics teachers) and novice teachers (n = 24 pre-service mathematics teachers) to determine the extent of differences in their judgment accuracy and their diagnostic reasoning about observable cues when diagnosing student profiles while watching a lesson video. ANOVA results indicate that experienced teachers generally achieved a higher judgment accuracy in diagnosing student profiles compared to novice teachers. Moreover, epistemic network analysis of observable cues in experienced and novice teachers' diagnostic reasoning showed that, compared to novice teachers, experienced teachers make more relations between a broader spectrum of both surface cues (e.g., a student's hand-raising behavior) and deep cues (e.g., a student being interested in the subject). Experienced teachers thereby construct more comprehensive and robust reasoning compared to novice teachers. The findings highlight how professional experience shapes teachers' professional skills, such as diagnosing, and suggest strategies for enhancing teacher training.

Absolute and Relative Judgment Accuracy: Early Childhood Teachers' Competence to Evaluate Children's Mathematical Skills.

This study examined absolute and relative judgment accuracies of German early childhood (EC) teachers with respect to the mathematical skills of the children under their supervision. The two types of judgment accuracies are crucial prerequisites for pacing activities in EC education and offering differentiated educational activities adapted to individual skill levels of children. Data from 39 EC teachers and 268 children were analyzed using multilevel modeling. Teachers rated the skills of children on a structured observation instrument ("Kinder Diagnose Tool," KiDiT). Children were assessed on their mathematical skills with a standardized test ("Mathematische Basiskompetenzen im Kindesalter," MBK-0). On average, 65% of the variation in judgments of teachers on the KiDiT could be explained by MBK-0 scores of children, which suggest that teachers are-on average-able to rank children within their groups. Teachers were also able to judge the mathematical level of skills of children as assessed by the MBK-0. Neither mathematical content knowledge (MCK) of teachers nor their mathematics pedagogical content knowledge (MPCK) or general pedagogical knowledge (GPK) moderated the relationship between judgments of teachers and test scores of children or the relationship between the level of the judgments and the level of test scores. Conclusions for future research and practice are drawn.

When Less Is More: How Complexity Impacts Goal Setting, Judgment Accuracy, and Deals in Negotiation.

In two studies, we examine how objective complexity-in terms of numbers of negotiable issues-affects negotiators' aspirations, perceptions, actions, and ultimately, the quality of agreements they reach. We hypothesized and found that when negotiators had a greater number of issues to resolve, they were less ambitious for their own outcomes and developed less accurate insights into their partners' interests.

Is Impression Management Through Status Updates Successful? Meta-Accuracy and Judgment Accuracy of Big Five Personality Traits Based on Status Updates From Social Network Sites in China.

Status updates on social network sites (SNSs) as a new medium for people to express "what is on your mind" on the Internet can provide much information. In the current study, we statistically analyzed survey data to examine whether individuals utilize impression management in their status updates on SNSs, whether their attempts at impression management are successful, and whether users who post these status updates can infer how others view them based on these contents, whether the status updates posted on SNSs reflect information about users' Big Five personality traits. The findings suggested that the meta-perception and perceivers' judgments of all five traits are quite accurate, despite users' aim to create different impression of most traits in their status updates. This study offers new empirical evidence about the model of interpersonal perception on SNSs and shows that status updates on SNSs can provide considerable information about their authors.

Nutrient-specific system versus full fact panel: Testing the benefits of nutrient-specific front-of-package labels in a student sample.

Current food labels include comprehensive nutritional information, but evaluations of their effects on judgments of nutritional quality and food choice are scarce. Building on previous empirical research that demonstrated that amount and complexity of information is negatively related to judgment accuracy, this study used an experimental design to evaluate nutritional information labels of varying complexity. Lens model analysis (Brunswik, 1952; Cooksey, 1996; Hammond, 1955; Stewart, 1976) was used to study the judgment process. Nutrition judgment accuracy was assessed by comparing nutrition judgments to a nutrition expert criterion (NuVal®) in three package labeling conditions. The conditions were: no nutritional information highlighted; nutrients highly related to nutritional quality highlighted using a front-of-package (FOP) label; and nutrients unrelated to nutritional quality highlighted using a FOP label. Findings indicate a limited role of FOP labeling in increasing judgment accuracy, consistency of nutritional information usage, and food choice. Implications for understanding labeling efforts to improve food choices are discussed.

Demographically diverse crowds are typically not much wiser than homogeneous crowds.

Averaging independent numerical judgments can be more accurate than the average individual judgment. This "wisdom of crowds" effect has been shown with large, diverse samples, but the layperson wishing to take advantage of this may only have access to the opinions of a small, more demographically homogeneous "convenience sample." How wise are homogeneous crowds relative to diverse crowds? In simulations and survey studies, we demonstrate three necessary conditions under which small socially diverse crowds can outperform socially homogeneous crowds: Social identity must predict judgment, the effect of social identity on judgment must be at least moderate in size, and the average estimates of the social groups in question must "bracket" the truth being judged. Seven survey studies suggest that these conditions are rarely met in real judgment tasks. Comparisons between the performances of diverse and homogeneous crowds further confirm that social diversity can make crowds wiser but typically by a very small margin.

How Do Different Ways of Measuring Individual Differences in Zero-Acquaintance Personality Judgment Accuracy Correlate With Each Other?

OBJECTIVE: This research compares two different approaches that are commonly used to measure accuracy of personality judgment: the trait accuracy approach wherein participants discriminate among targets on a given trait, thus making intertarget comparisons, and the profile accuracy approach wherein participants discriminate between traits for a given target, thus making intratarget comparisons. We examined correlations between these methods as well as correlations among accuracies for judging specific traits. METHOD: The present article documents relations among these approaches based on meta-analysis of five studies of zero-acquaintance impressions of the Big Five traits. RESULTS: Trait accuracies correlated only weakly with overall and normative profile accuracy. Substantial convergence between the trait and profile accuracy methods was only found when an aggregate of all five trait accuracies was correlated with distinctive profile accuracy. Importantly, however, correlations between the trait and profile accuracy approaches were reduced to negligibility when statistical overlap was corrected by removing the respective trait from the profile correlations. Moreover, correlations of the separate trait accuracies with each other were very weak. CONCLUSIONS: Different ways of measuring individual differences in personality judgment accuracy are not conceptually and empirically the same, but rather represent distinct abilities that rely on different judgment processes.

Counselors' attachment anxiety and avoidance and the congruence in clients' and therapists' working alliance ratings.

OBJECTIVE: To determine how counselors' attachment anxiety and avoidance related to congruence between counselors' and clients' Working alliance (WA) ratings. Congruence strength was defined as the regression coefficient for clients' WA ratings predicting counselors' WA ratings. Directional bias was defined as the difference in level between counselors' and clients' WA ratings. METHOD: Twenty-seven graduate student counselors completed an attachment measure and they and their 64 clients completed a measure of WA early in therapy. The truth-and-bias analysis was adapted to analyze the data. RESULTS: As hypothesized counselors' WA ratings were significantly and positively related to clients' WA ratings. Also as hypothesized, counselors' WA ratings were significantly lower than their clients' WA ratings (directional bias). Increasing counselor attachment anxiety was related to increasing negative directional bias; as counselors' attachment anxiety increased the difference between counselors and clients WA ratings became more negative. There was a significant interaction between counselor attachment anxiety and congruence strength in predicting counselor WA ratings. There was a stronger relationship between client WA ratings and counselor WA ratings for counselors low versus high in attachment anxiety. CONCLUSION: Counselors' attachment anxiety is realted to their ability to accurately percieve their clients' WA.

Analysis of nutrition judgments using the Nutrition Facts Panel.

UNLABELLED: Consumers' judgments and choices of the nutritional value of food products (cereals and snacks) were studied as a function of using information in the Nutrition Facts Panel (NFP, National Labeling and Education Act, 1990). Brunswik's lens model (Brunswik, 1955; Cooksey, 1996; Hammond, 1955; Stewart, 1988) served as the theoretical and analytical tool for examining the judgment process. Lens model analysis was further enriched with the criticality of predictors' technique developed by Azen, Budescu, & Reiser (2001). Judgment accuracy was defined as correspondence between consumers' judgments and the nutritional quality index, NuVal(®), obtained from an expert system. The study also examined several individual level variables (e.g., age, gender, BMI, educational level, health status, health beliefs, etc.) as predictors of lens model indices that measure judgment consistency, judgment accuracy, and knowledge of the environment. Results showed varying levels of consistency and accuracy depending on the food product, but generally the median values of the lens model statistics were moderate. Judgment consistency was higher for more educated individuals; judgment accuracy was predicted from a combination of person level characteristics, and individuals who reported having regular meals had models that were in greater agreement with the expert's model. CONCLUSIONS: Lens model methodology is a useful tool for understanding how individuals perceive the nutrition in foods based on the NFP label. Lens model judgment indices were generally low, highlighting that the benefits of the complex NFP label may be more modest than what has been previously assumed.

Bayesian hierarchical framework for occupational hygiene decision making.

A hierarchical Bayesian framework has been developed for exposure assessment that makes use of statistical sampling-based techniques to estimate the posterior probability of the 95th percentile or arithmetic mean of the exposure distribution being located in one of several exposure categories. The framework can synthesize professional judgment and monitoring data to yield an updated posterior exposure assignment for routine exposure management. The framework is versatile enough that it can be modified for use in epidemiological studies for classifying the arithmetic mean instead of the 95th percentile into several exposure categories. Various physico-chemical exposure models have also been incorporated in the hierarchical framework. The use of the framework in three settings has been illustrated. First, subjective judgments about exposure magnitude obtained from industrial hygienists for five tasks were treated as priors in the Bayesian framework. Monitoring data for each task were used to create a likelihood function in the hierarchical framework and the posterior was predicted in terms of the 95th percentile being located in each of the four AIHA exposure categories. The accuracy of the exposure judgments was then evaluated. Second, we illustrate the use of exposure models to develop priors in this framework and compare with monitoring data in an iron foundry. Finally, we illustrate the use of this approach for retrospective exposure assessment in a chemical manufacturing facility, to categorize exposures based on arithmetic mean instead of 95th percentile.

Personality Stability from Childhood to Midlife: Relating Teachers' Assessments in Elementary School to Observer- and Self-Ratings 40 Years Later.

We report on the longitudinal stability of personality traits across an average 40 years in the Hawaii Personality and Health Cohort relating childhood teacher assessments of personality to adult self- and observer- reports. Stabilities based on self-ratings in adulthood were compared to those measured by the Structured Interview for the Five-Factor Model (SIFFM; Trull & Widiger, 1997), and trait ratings completed by interviewers. Although convergence between self-reports and observer-ratings was modest, childhood traits demonstrated similar levels of stability across methods in adulthood. Extraversion and Conscientiousness generally showed higher stabilities, whereas Neuroticism showed none. For Agreeableness and Intellect/Openness, stability was highest when assessed with observer-ratings. These findings are discussed in terms of differences in trait evaluativeness and observability across measurement methods.