Noise: How to Overcome the High, Hidden Cost of Inconsistent Decision Making
[BIBLIOGRAPHIC RECORD ONLY, read at the api.openalex.org item record, OpenAlex W2566818341, where author order is verified with Kahneman author_position 'first', then Rosenfield, Gandhi and Blaser. 156 citations recorded. THE ARTICLE TEXT WAS NOT READ] Kahneman, D., Rosenfield, A. M., Gandhi, L., & Blaser, T. (2016). 'Noise: How to Overcome the High, Hidden Cost of Inconsistent Decision Making.' Harvard Business Review, 94(10), 38-46. THIS IS THE ORIGIN OF THE INSURANCE NOISE AUDIT AND THE ANSWER TO THE BRIEF'S FIRST QUESTION. Three findings follow and all three belong in the prose. ONE, Harvard Business Review is a practitioner magazine, not a peer-reviewed research journal: it carries no DOI for this piece, publishes no methods section of the kind a reliability study needs, and submits nothing to referees, so the 55 per cent has never been through peer review in any venue found, in 2016 or since. TWO, the co-authors are the consultancy and not Sibony and Sunstein, who are not authors of the 2016 article. THIS CORRECTS THE VAULT, which attributed the consulting channel to Sibony's and Sunstein's affiliations; report the authorship line and attribute no motive to anyone. THREE, the data cannot be checked: the insurer is unnamed, the consulting firm is unnamed in the book, no headcount of underwriters or claims adjusters appears anywhere in the book or the vault, and there is no dataset, no appendix of raw judgements and no independent replication. That is a PROVENANCE LIMIT, NOT A REPLICATION FAILURE, and the distinction should be drawn: nobody has tried and failed to reproduce 55 per cent, and nobody can try. The article must carry this in the same breath as the number.
[BIBLIOGRAPHIC RECORD ONLY, read at the api.openalex.org item record, OpenAlex W2566818341, where author order is verified with Kahneman author_position 'first', then Rosenfield, Gandhi and Blaser. 156 citations recorded. THE ARTICLE TEXT WAS NOT READ] Kahneman, D., Rosenfield, A. M., Gandhi, L., & Blaser, T. (2016). 'Noise: How to Overcome the High, Hidden Cost of Inconsistent Decision Making.' Harvard Business Review, 94(10), 38-46. THIS IS THE ORIGIN OF THE INSURANCE NOISE AUDIT AND THE ANSWER TO THE BRIEF'S FIRST QUESTION. Three findings follow and all three belong in the prose. ONE, Harvard Business Review is a practitioner magazine, not a peer-reviewed research journal: it carries no DOI for this piece, publishes no methods section of the kind a reliability study needs, and submits nothing to referees, so the 55 per cent has never been through peer review in any venue found, in 2016 or since. TWO, the co-authors are the consultancy and not Sibony and Sunstein, who are not authors of the 2016 article. THIS CORRECTS THE VAULT, which attributed the consulting channel to Sibony's and Sunstein's affiliations; report the authorship line and attribute no motive to anyone. THREE, the data cannot be checked: the insurer is unnamed, the consulting firm is unnamed in the book, no headcount of underwriters or claims adjusters appears anywhere in the book or the vault, and there is no dataset, no appendix of raw judgements and no independent replication. That is a PROVENANCE LIMIT, NOT A REPLICATION FAILURE, and the distinction should be drawn: nobody has tried and failed to reproduce 55 per cent, and nobody can try. The article must carry this in the same breath as the number.
Written from the bIBLIOGRAPHIC RECORD ONLY, read at the api.openalex.org item record, OpenAlex W2566818341, where author order is verified with Kahneman author_position 'first', then Rosenfield, Gandhi and Blaser. 156 citations recorded. THE ARTICLE TEXT WAS NOT READ.
What our sources record
Recorded when this source was checked, figures included, with page references and quotation marks removed.
Kahneman, D., Rosenfield, A. M., Gandhi, L., & Blaser, T. (2016). Noise: How to Overcome the High, Hidden Cost of Inconsistent Decision Making. Harvard Business Review, 94(10), 38-46