IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/jbrese/v68y2015i8p1800-1809.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Communicating forecasts: The simplicity of simulated experience

Author

Listed:
  • Hogarth, Robin M.
  • Soyer, Emre

Abstract

It is unclear whether decision makers who receive forecasts expressed as probability distributions over outcomes understand the implications of this form of communication. We suggest a solution based on the fact that people are effective at estimating the frequency of data accurately in environments that are characterized by plentiful, unbiased feedback. Thus, forecasters should provide decision makers with simulation models that allow them to experience the frequencies of potential outcomes. Before implementing this suggestion, however, it is important to assess whether people can make appropriate probabilistic inferences based on such simulated experience. In an experimental program, we find that statistically sophisticated and naïve individuals relate easily to this presentation mode, they prefer it to analytic descriptions, and their probabilistic inferences improve. We conclude that asking decision makers to use simulations actively is potentially a powerful – and simplifying – method to improve the practice of forecasting.

Suggested Citation

  • Hogarth, Robin M. & Soyer, Emre, 2015. "Communicating forecasts: The simplicity of simulated experience," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 68(8), pages 1800-1809.
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:jbrese:v:68:y:2015:i:8:p:1800-1809
    DOI: 10.1016/j.jbusres.2015.03.039
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0148296315001575
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.jbusres.2015.03.039?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Richard H. Thaler & Shlomo Benartzi, 2004. "Save More Tomorrow (TM): Using Behavioral Economics to Increase Employee Saving," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 112(S1), pages 164-187, February.
    2. David Budescu & Han-Hui Por & Stephen Broomell, 2012. "Effective communication of uncertainty in the IPCC reports," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 113(2), pages 181-200, July.
    3. Shlomo Benartzi & Richard H. Thaler, 1999. "Risk Aversion or Myopia? Choices in Repeated Gambles and Retirement Investments," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 45(3), pages 364-381, March.
    4. Herbert A. Simon, 1996. "The Sciences of the Artificial, 3rd Edition," MIT Press Books, The MIT Press, edition 1, volume 1, number 0262691914, December.
    5. Lejarraga, Tomás & Gonzalez, Cleotilde, 2011. "Effects of feedback and complexity on repeated decisions from description," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 116(2), pages 286-295.
    6. Christine Kaufmann & Martin Weber & Emily Haisley, 2013. "The Role of Experience Sampling and Graphical Displays on One's Investment Risk Appetite," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 59(2), pages 323-340, July.
    7. Soyer, Emre & Hogarth, Robin M., 2012. "The illusion of predictability: How regression statistics mislead experts," International Journal of Forecasting, Elsevier, vol. 28(3), pages 695-711.
    8. Robin M. Hogarth & Spyros Makridakis, 1981. "Forecasting and Planning: An Evaluation," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 27(2), pages 115-138, February.
    9. Daniel G. Goldstein & Eric J. Johnson & William F. Sharpe, 2008. "Choosing Outcomes versus Choosing Products: Consumer-Focused Retirement Investment Advice," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 35(3), pages 440-456, August.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Andraszewicz, Sandra & Friedman, Jason & Kaszás, Dániel & Hölscher, Christoph, 2023. "Zurich Trading Simulator (ZTS) — A dynamic trading experimental tool for oTree," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Finance, Elsevier, vol. 37(C).
    2. Rawley Heimer & Zwetelina Iliewa & Alex Imas & Martin Weber, 2021. "Dynamic Inconsistency in Risky Choice: Evidence From the Lab and Field," CRC TR 224 Discussion Paper Series crctr224_2021_274, University of Bonn and University of Mannheim, Germany.
    3. Green, Kesten C. & Armstrong, J. Scott, 2015. "Simple versus complex forecasting: The evidence," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 68(8), pages 1678-1685.
    4. Anna Borucka, 2023. "Seasonal Methods of Demand Forecasting in the Supply Chain as Support for the Company’s Sustainable Growth," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(9), pages 1-21, April.
    5. Thomas Rouyard & Yukichi Mano & Bocar Mamadou Daff & Serigne Diouf & Khadidiatou Fall Dia & Laetitia Duval & Josselin Thuilliez & Ryota Nakamura, 2022. "Operational and Structural Factors Influencing Enrolment in Community-Based Health Insurance Schemes: An Observational Study Using 12 Waves of Nationwide Panel Data from Senegal," Post-Print halshs-03641124, HAL.
    6. Soyer, Emre & Hogarth, Robin M., 2015. "The golden rule of forecasting: Objections, refinements, and enhancements," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 68(8), pages 1702-1704.
    7. Theodore G. Shepherd & Emily Boyd & Raphael A. Calel & Sandra C. Chapman & Suraje Dessai & Ioana M. Dima-West & Hayley J. Fowler & Rachel James & Douglas Maraun & Olivia Martius & Catherine A. Senior , 2018. "Storylines: an alternative approach to representing uncertainty in physical aspects of climate change," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 151(3), pages 555-571, December.
    8. Azzurra Morreale & Jan Stoklasa & Mikael Collan & Giovanna Lo Nigro, 2018. "Uncertain outcome presentations bias decisions: experimental evidence from Finland and Italy," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 268(1), pages 259-272, September.
    9. Cartwright, Samantha J. & Bowgen, Katharine M. & Collop, Catherine & Hyder, Kieran & Nabe-Nielsen, Jacob & Stafford, Richard & Stillman, Richard A. & Thorpe, Robert B. & Sibly, Richard M., 2016. "Communicating complex ecological models to non-scientist end users," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 338(C), pages 51-59.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. L. Robin Keller & Yitong Wang, 2017. "Information Presentation in Decision and Risk Analysis: Answered, Partly Answered, and Unanswered Questions," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 37(6), pages 1132-1145, June.
    2. Bradbury, Meike A.S. & Hens, Thorsten & Zeisberger, Stefan, 2019. "How persistent are the effects of experience sampling on investor behavior?," Journal of Banking & Finance, Elsevier, vol. 98(C), pages 61-79.
    3. Meyer, Steffen & Urban, Linda & Ahlswede, Sophie, 2015. "Does a personalized feedback on investment success mitigate investment mistakes of private investors? Answers from large natural field experiment," VfS Annual Conference 2015 (Muenster): Economic Development - Theory and Policy 112988, Verein für Socialpolitik / German Economic Association.
    4. Hazel Bateman & Christine Eckert & John Geweke & Jordan Louviere & Stephen Satchell & Susan Thorp, 2016. "Risk Presentation and Portfolio Choice," Review of Finance, European Finance Association, vol. 20(1), pages 201-229.
    5. Olschewski, Sebastian & Diao, Linan & Rieskamp, Jörg, 2021. "Reinforcement learning about asset variability and correlation in repeated portfolio decisions," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Finance, Elsevier, vol. 32(C).
    6. Dennis Vrecko & Thomas Langer, 2013. "What Are Investors Willing to Pay to Customize Their Investment Product?," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 59(8), pages 1855-1870, August.
    7. Felix Holzmeister & Jürgen Huber & Michael Kirchler & Florian Lindner & Utz Weitzel & Stefan Zeisberger, 2020. "What Drives Risk Perception? A Global Survey with Financial Professionals and Laypeople," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 66(9), pages 3977-4002, September.
    8. Kaufmann, Christine & Weber, Martin, 2013. "Sometimes less is more – The influence of information aggregation on investment decisions," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 95(C), pages 20-33.
    9. Bateman, Hazel & Ebling, Christine & Geweke, John & Jordan, Louviere & Stephen, Satchell & Susan, Thorp, 2011. "Economic Rationality, Risk Presentation, and Retirement Portfolio Choice," MPRA Paper 29371, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    10. Donkers, A.C.D. & Lourenço, C.J.S. & Dellaert, B.G.C. & Goldstein, D.G., 2013. "Using Preferred Outcome Distributions to Estimate Value and Probability Weighting Functions in Decisions under Risk," ERIM Report Series Research in Management ERS-2013-005-MKT, Erasmus Research Institute of Management (ERIM), ERIM is the joint research institute of the Rotterdam School of Management, Erasmus University and the Erasmus School of Economics (ESE) at Erasmus University Rotterdam.
    11. Shlomo Benartzi & Richard Thaler, 2007. "Heuristics and Biases in Retirement Savings Behavior," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 21(3), pages 81-104, Summer.
    12. van Rooij, Maarten C.J. & Kool, Clemens J.M. & Prast, Henriette M., 2007. "Risk-return preferences in the pension domain: Are people able to choose?," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 91(3-4), pages 701-722, April.
    13. Eduard Marinov, 2017. "The 2017 Nobel Prize in Economics," Economic Thought journal, Bulgarian Academy of Sciences - Economic Research Institute, issue 6, pages 117-159.
    14. Azzurra Morreale & Jan Stoklasa & Mikael Collan & Giovanna Lo Nigro, 2018. "Uncertain outcome presentations bias decisions: experimental evidence from Finland and Italy," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 268(1), pages 259-272, September.
    15. Soyer, Emre & Hogarth, Robin M., 2015. "The golden rule of forecasting: Objections, refinements, and enhancements," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 68(8), pages 1702-1704.
    16. Tomasz Jedynak, 2022. "Does the Formulation of the Decision Problem Affect Retirement?—Framing Effect and Planned Retirement Age," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(4), pages 1-30, February.
    17. Michael P. Keane & Susan Thorp, 2016. "Complex Decision Making: The Roles of Cognitive Limitations, Cognitive Decline and Ageing," Economics Papers 2016-W10, Economics Group, Nuffield College, University of Oxford.
    18. Camilleri, Adrian R. & Newell, Ben R., 2019. "Better calibration when predicting from experience (rather than description)," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 150(C), pages 62-82.
    19. Bateman, Hazel & Eckert, Christine & Geweke, John & Louviere, Jordan & Satchell, Stephen & Thorp, Susan, 2014. "Financial competence, risk presentation and retirement portfolio preferences," Journal of Pension Economics and Finance, Cambridge University Press, vol. 13(1), pages 27-61, January.
    20. Nicolas Aubert & Niaz Kammoun & Yacine Bekrar, 2018. "Financial decisions of the financially literate," Finance, Presses universitaires de Grenoble, vol. 39(2), pages 43-91.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:jbrese:v:68:y:2015:i:8:p:1800-1809. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/jbusres .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.