Figure 1.
The lens model applied to physicians' diagnosis of cancer (see [8]).
Figure 2.
The process of identifying relevant studies for the meta-analysis.
Table 1.
Study characteristics ordered according to decision domain and expertise.
Table 2.
Characteristics of studies in the ‘miscellaneous’ domain ordered by expertise.
Figure 3.
Forest plots of judgmental achievement and the underlying components.
Table 3.
Comparison of estimations of judgmental achievement (ra) with different meta-analytical approaches ordered by domain and experience level.
Table 4.
Comparison of estimations of the linear knowledge component (G) with different meta-analytical approaches ordered by domain and experience level.
Table 5.
Comparison of estimations of the consistency component (Rs) with different meta-analytical approaches ordered by domain and experience level.
Table 6.
Comparison of estimations of the task-predictability component (Re) with different meta-analytical approaches ordered by domain and experience level.
Table 7.
Comparison of the success of bootstrapping judges with a linear judgment model (GRe) based on different meta-analytical approaches (bare-bones vs. psychometric approach).