Cade Massey

• Edward Chang, Katherine L. Milkman, Dena Gromet, Reb Rebele, Cade Massey, Angela Duckworth, Adam Grant (2019), The Mixed Effects of Online Diversity Training, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 116 (15), pp. 7778-7783. Abstract

  We present results from a large (n = 3,016) field experiment at a global organization testing whether a brief science-based online diversity training can change attitudes and behaviors toward women in the workplace. Our preregistered field experiment included an active placebo control and measured participants’ attitudes and real workplace decisions up to 20 weeks postintervention. Among groups whose average untreated attitudes—whereas still supportive of women—were relatively less supportive of women than other groups, our diversity training successfully produced attitude change but not behavior change. On the other hand, our diversity training successfully generated some behavior change among groups whose average untreated attitudes were already strongly supportive of women before training. This paper extends our knowledge about the pathways to attitude and behavior change in the context of bias reduction. However, the results suggest that the one-off diversity trainings that are commonplace in organizations are unlikely to be stand-alone solutions for promoting equality in the workplace, particularly given their limited efficacy among those groups whose behaviors policymakers are most eager to influence.

• Cade Massey (2019), How You Can Have More Impact as a People Analyst, MIT Sloan Management Review, Spring 2019 ().
• Berkeley J. Dietvorst, Joseph Simmons, Cade Massey (2018), Overcoming Algorithm Aversion: People Will Use Algorithms If They Can (Even Slightly) Modify Them, Management Science, 64 (), pp. 1155-1170. Abstract

  Although evidence-based algorithms consistently outperform human forecasters, people often fail to use them after learning that they are imperfect, a phenomenon known as algorithm aversion. In this paper, we present three studies investigating how to reduce algorithm aversion. In incentivized forecasting tasks, participants chose between using their own forecasts or those of an algorithm that was built by experts. Participants were considerably more likely to choose to use an imperfect algorithm when they could modify its forecasts, and they performed better as a result. Notably, the preference for modifiable algorithms held even when participants were severely restricted in the modifications they could make (Studies 1-3). In fact, our results suggest that participants’ preference for modifiable algorithms was indicative of a desire for some control over the forecasting outcome, and not for a desire for greater control over the forecasting outcome, as participants’ preference for modifiable algorithms was relatively insensitive to the magnitude of the modifications they were able to make (Study 2). Additionally, we found that giving participants the freedom to modify an imperfect algorithm made them feel more satisfied with the forecasting process, more likely to believe that the algorithm was superior, and more likely to choose to use an algorithm to make subsequent forecasts (Study 3).  This research suggests that one can reduce algorithm aversion by giving people some control – even a slight amount – over an imperfect algorithm’s forecast.

• James J. Choi, Emily Haisley, Jennifer Kurkoski, Cade Massey (2017), Small Cues Change Savings Choices, Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, 142 (), pp. 378-395.
• Berkeley Dietvorst, Joseph Simmons, Cade Massey (2015), Algorithm Aversion: People Erroneously Avoid Algorithms After Seeing Them Err, Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 144 (February) (), pp. 114-126. Abstract

  Research shows that evidence-based algorithms more accurately predict the future than do human forecasters. Yet when forecasters are deciding whether to use a human forecaster or a statistical algorithm, they often choose the human forecaster. This phenomenon, which we call algorithm aversion, is costly, and it is important to understand its causes. We show that people are especially averse to algorithmic forecasters after seeing them perform, even when they see them outperform a human forecaster. This is because people more quickly lose confidence in algorithmic than human forecasters after seeing them make the same mistake. In 5 studies, participants either saw an algorithm make forecasts, a human make forecasts, both, or neither. They then decided whether to tie their incentives to the future predictions of the algorithm or the human. Participants who saw the algorithm perform were less confident in it, and less likely to choose it over an inferior human forecaster. This was true even among those who saw the algorithm outperform the human.

   

• Cade Massey (2013), Rev. of Schelling’s Game Theory: How to Make Decisions by Robert V. Dodge, Journal of Economic Literature.
• Cade Massey and Richard H Thaler (2013), The Loser’s Curse: Decision Making and Market Efficiency in the National Football League Draft, Management Science.
• Y. Li, Cade Massey, G. Wu (Working), Learning to Detect Change.
• Joseph Simmons and Cade Massey (2012), Is Optimism Real?, Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 141 (November) (), pp. 630-634. Abstract

  Is optimism real, or are optimistic forecasts just cheap talk? To help answer this question, we investigated whether optimistic predictions persist in the face of large incentives to be accurate. We asked National Football League football fans to predict the winner of a single game. Roughly half (the partisans) predicted a game involving their favorite team and the other half (the neutrals) predicted a game involving two teams they were neutral about. Participants were promised either a small incentive ($5) or a large incentive ($50) for correctly predicting the game’s winner. Optimism emerged even when incentives were large, as partisans were much more likely than neutrals to predict partisans’ favorite teams to win. Strong optimism also emerged among participants whose responses to follow-up questions strongly suggested that they believed the predictions they made. This research supports the claim that optimism is real.

  Related
  Files

  Supplement
• Cade Massey, Joseph Simmons, David A. Armor (2011), Hope Over Experience: Desirability and the Persistence of Optimism, Psychological Science, 22 (February), 274-281. Abstract

  Many important decisions hinge on expectations of future outcomes. Decisions about health, investments, and relationships all depend on predictions of the future. These expectations are often optimistic: People frequently believe that their preferred outcomes are more likely than is merited. Yet it is unclear whether optimism persists with experience and, surprisingly, whether optimism is truly caused by desire. These are important questions because life’s most consequential decisions often feature both strong preferences and the opportunity to learn. We investigated these questions by collecting football predictions from National Football League fans during each week of the 2008 season. Despite accuracy incentives and extensive feedback, predictions about preferred teams remained optimistically biased through the entire season. Optimism was as strong after 4 months as it was after 4 weeks. We exploited variation in preferences and matchups to show that desirability fueled this optimistic bias.

• All Research from Cade Massey »

Full-time MBA: Negotiation, Influence

Executive MBA: Influence

Executive Education: Strategic Decision-making Mindset (2/year), Executive Negotiation Workshop (3/year)

Coursera, “People Analytics”

Current Courses

• LGST6930 - Influence

  Building, protecting and using influence is critical for achieving your goals. This requires good personal decision making as well as understanding others' decision-making, proficiency at the negotiation table as well as with the tacit negotiations before and after sitting at the table. In this course, we focus on building your facility with a wide range of influence tools to help with these efforts. Topics include power and status, informal networks, coalitions and persuasion.

  LGST6930401 ( Syllabus )

• OIDD6930 - Influence

  Building, protecting and using influence is critical for achieving your goals. This requires good personal decision making as well as understanding others' decision-making, proficiency at the negotiation table as well as with the tacit negotiations before and after sitting at the table. In this course, we focus on building your facility with a wide range of influence tools to help with these efforts. Topics include power and status, informal networks, coalitions and persuasion.

  OIDD6930401 ( Syllabus )

Past Courses

• LGST6930 - Influence

  Building, protecting and using influence is critical for achieving your goals. This requires good personal decision making as well as understanding others' decision-making, proficiency at the negotiation table as well as with the tacit negotiations before and after sitting at the table. In this course, we focus on building your facility with a wide range of influence tools to help with these efforts. Topics include power and status, informal networks, coalitions and persuasion.

• LGST8060 - Negotiations

  This course examines the art and science of negotiation, with additional emphasis on conflict resolution. Students will engage in a number of simulated negotiations ranging from simple one-issue transactions to multi-party joint ventures. Through these exercises and associated readings, students explore the basic theoretical models of bargaining and have an opportunity to test and improve their negotiation skills. Cross-listed with MGMT 6910/OIDD 6910/LGST 8060. Format: Lecture, class discussion, simulation/role play, and video demonstrations. Materials: Textbook and course pack.

• MGMT6910 - Negotiations

  This course examines the art and science of negotiation, with additional emphasis on conflict resolution. Students will engage in a number of simulated negotiations ranging from simple one-issue transactions to multi-party joint ventures. Through these exercises and associated readings, students explore the basic theoretical models of bargaining and have an opportunity to test and improve their negotiation skills. Cross-listed with MGMT 6910/OIDD 6910/LGST 8060. Format: Lecture, class discussion, simulation/role play, and video demonstrations. Materials: Textbook and course pack.

• OIDD3990 - Supervised Study

  This course number is currently used for several course types including independent studies, experimental courses and Management & Technology Freshman Seminar. Instructor permission required to enroll in any independent study. Wharton Undergraduate students must also receive approval from the Undergraduate Division to register for independent studies. Section 002 is the Management and Technology Freshman Seminar; instruction permission is not required for this section and is only open to M&T students. For Fall 2020, Section 004 is a new course titled AI, Business, and Society. The course provides a overview of AI and its role in business transformation. The purpose of this course is to improve understanding of AI, discuss the many ways in which AI is being used in the industry, and provide a strategic framework for how to bring AI to the center of digital transformation efforts. In terms of AI overview, we will go over a brief technical overview for students who are not actively immersed in AI (topic covered include Big Data, data warehousing, data-mining, different forms of machine learning, etc). In terms of business applications, we will consider applications of AI in media, Finance, retail, and other industries. Finally, we will consider how AI can be used as a source of competitive advantage. We will conclude with a discussion of ethical challenges and a governance framework for AI. No prior technical background is assumed but some interest in (and exposure to) technology is helpful. Every effort is made to build most of the lectures from the basics.

• OIDD6910 - Negotiations

  This course examines the art and science of negotiation, with additional emphasis on conflict resolution. Students will engage in a number of simulated negotiations ranging from simple one-issue transactions to multi-party joint ventures. Through these exercises and associated readings, students explore the basic theoretical models of bargaining and have an opportunity to test and improve their negotiation skills. Cross-listed with MGMT 6910/OIDD 6910/LGST 8060. Format: Lecture, class discussion, simulation/role play, and video demonstrations. Materials: Textbook and course pack.

• OIDD6930 - Influence

  Building, protecting and using influence is critical for achieving your goals. This requires good personal decision making as well as understanding others' decision-making, proficiency at the negotiation table as well as with the tacit negotiations before and after sitting at the table. In this course, we focus on building your facility with a wide range of influence tools to help with these efforts. Topics include power and status, informal networks, coalitions and persuasion.

• Helen Kardon Moss Anvil Award, 2016
• Excellence in Teaching - Wharton Executive MBA Program, 2016
• One of ten faculty nominated by the MBA student body for the Helen Kardon Moss Anvil Award 2012, 2014, 2015
• Teaching Excellence Award, MBA-E Program, Yale School of Management, 2010
• Google Faculty Research Grant, 2010
• Daimler Chrysler Elective Teaching Award, Fuqua School of Business, 2004
• Daimler Chrysler Elective Teaching Award, Fuqua School of Business, 2002
• Hillel Einhorn Memorial Fellowship, 2000
• Best Student Paper in Decision Analysis, INFORMS, 2000

Knowledge @ Wharton

• How Dynamic Electricity Pricing Can Improve Market Efficiency, Knowledge @ Wharton - 11/12/2024
• Is Algorithmic Management Too Controlling?, Knowledge @ Wharton - 11/12/2024
• The Hidden Cost of AI Energy Consumption, Knowledge @ Wharton - 11/12/2024
• Charitable and Political Giving | Pinar Yildirim, Knowledge @ Wharton - 11/12/2024
• The Future of Banking, Knowledge @ Wharton - 11/11/2024
• Election Statistics, Knowledge @ Wharton - 11/06/2024
• Robots Are Taking Over Low-skilled Jobs — and Changing Votes, Knowledge @ Wharton - 11/05/2024
• Crypto Politics: Liberals’ and Conservatives’ Confidence in Cryptocurrencies, Knowledge @ Wharton - 11/05/2024
• Leadership and Elections | Mike Useem, Knowledge @ Wharton - 11/05/2024
• Automation Is Harming Low-skilled Workers and Possibly Their Voting Preferences, Knowledge @ Wharton - 11/01/2024