SCIRP Mobile Website
Paper Submission

Why Us? >>

  • - Open Access
  • - Peer-reviewed
  • - Rapid publication
  • - Lifetime hosting
  • - Free indexing service
  • - Free promotion service
  • - More citations
  • - Search engine friendly

Free SCIRP Newsletters>>

Add your e-mail address to receive free newsletters from SCIRP.

 

Contact Us >>

WhatsApp  +86 18163351462(WhatsApp)
   
Paper Publishing WeChat
Book Publishing WeChat
(or Email:book@scirp.org)

Article citations

More>>

Reimers, J. and Butler, S. (1992) The Effect of Outcome Knowledge on Auditors’ Judgmental Evaluations. Accounting, Organizations and Society, 17, 185-194.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/0361-3682(92)90010-P

has been cited by the following article:

  • TITLE: Effect of Intention on Outcome Bias in Decision Making—Implications for Safety Management

    AUTHORS: Atsuo Murata, Tomoko Nakamura

    KEYWORDS: Decision Making, Outcome, Process, Intention, Outcome Bias, Cognitive Bias, Safety Management

    JOURNAL NAME: Journal of Behavioral and Brain Science, Vol.5 No.13, December 2, 2015

    ABSTRACT: The evidence of outcome bias was explored in a two-player (Player 1: allocator and Player 2: evaluator) economic game experiment where the reward allocation was made between two players. The experimental factors were the intention of an allocator (Player 1), the type of chosen dice (selfish, fair, and generous), and the outcome (selfish, fair, and generous). The outcome bias occurred when the type of dice chosen by the allocator (Player 1) was not only a selfish one but also a generous one. The comparison between the two conditions (intentional and no-intentional conditions) definitely showed that Player 2 punished Player 1 to a larger extent when the outcome was disadvantageous for Player 2 (selfish outcome) and Player 2 rewarded Player 1 when the outcome was advantageous (generous outcome) irrespective of whether the die was chosen out of the three types intentionally or not. Moreover, the outcome bias was not observed when the outcome was fair. Thus, we could verify the hypothesis that we are readily got trapped in the outcome bias. Some implications were given for safety management that put more emphasis on the process than on the outcome.