The present research demonstrates a so far unrecognized impediment of group performance, metacognitive myopia (Fiedler, 2012). Judges and decision‐makers follow the given samples of information uncritically and neglect the metacognitive assessment of the samples' validity. Applying this notion to dyadic judgments, we instructed dyads to jointly estimate conditional probabilities p (Win|A) and p (Win|B) of Lotteries A and B. One person per dyad experienced a valid sample (winning rates conditional on lotteries). The other person experienced an invalid, reverse sample (lotteries conditional on winning). Whereas valid samples provide unbiased estimates of lotteries' winning probabilities, invalid samples can greatly misrepresent the association of winning and lotteries (depending on lottery base rates). Across three experiments, metacognitive myopia—both at the individual and at the dyadic group level—prevented participants from discriminating valid and invalid samples. Group judgments were biased toward erroneous implications of invalid samples, reflecting an equality bias among unequal group members.

中文翻译：

---

基于冲突样本的二元判断：无法忽略无效输入

本研究表明，迄今为止尚无公认的小组绩效障碍，即元认知近视（Fiedler，2012）。法官和决策者不加批判地遵循给定的信息样本，而忽略了对样本有效性的元认知评估。将这一概念应用于二元判决，我们指示二元组共同估计条件概率p（Win | A）和p彩票A和B的（Win | B）。每个双胞胎一个人经历了有效的样本（中奖率取决于彩票）。另一个人遇到了无效的反向样本（以中奖为条件的彩票）。有效样本提供了彩票中奖概率的无偏估计，而无效样本可能会严重歪曲中奖和彩票的关联（取决于彩票基本费率）。在三个实验中，无论是在个人还是在二元组水平上，元认知近视都可以防止参与者区分有效样本和无效样本。群体判断偏向于无效样本的错误含义，反映了不平等群体成员之间的平等偏见。