ABSTRACT
Analysis of the factors which affect the quality of human judgement has generated considerable research within disciplines which share an interest in decision processes and outcomes: economics, psychology and management in particular. A feature of the resulting literature is the degree of consensus which has emerged regarding the factors which inhibit the quality of human judgement and the decisions which result. In particular, there is a growing body of evidence of discrepancies between individuals’ subjective probability estimates and the relevant objective probabilities. This consensus of poor calibration reflects the outcome of research conducted mainly within the dominant methodological tradition of laboratory-based, experimental enquiry. The principal aim of this chapter is to offer a complementary body of analysis which explores decision-making in a non-experimental and naturalistic environment. Whilst it is acknowledged that experimentation can be conducted within a natural setting, throughout this chapter the term naturalistic is defined as a natural environment which has not been artificially manipulated (i.e. a nonexperimental setting).
