A Comparative Analysis of the Rationality of Consensus Forecasts of U.S. Economic Indicators
AbstractThe purpose of this article is to investigate the rationality of two survey forecasts of selective U.S. macroeconomic performance measures that were widely followed in the financial markets during the 19902000 period. The research compares the rationality of survey forecast data from Money Market Services, Inc., and Thomson Financial. This article extends prior research that has evaluated the rationality of Money Market Services data for earlier time periods while also evaluating similar consensus forecast data from Thomson Financial that were widely reported in both Barron's and the Wall Street Journal during the 1990s.
Download InfoIf you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.
As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to look for a different version under "Related research" (further below) or search for a different version of it.
Bibliographic InfoArticle provided by University of Chicago Press in its journal Journal of Business.
Volume (Year): 76 (2003)
Issue (Month): 4 (October)
Contact details of provider:
Web page: http://www.journals.uchicago.edu/JB/
You can help add them by filling out this form.
CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
- Hess, Dieter & Orbe, Sebastian, 2011. "Irrationality or efficiency of macroeconomic survey forecasts? Implications from the anchoring bias test," CFR Working Papers 11-13, University of Cologne, Centre for Financial Research (CFR).
- Audretsch, David B. & Stadtmann, Georg, 2005.
"Biases in FX-Forecasts: Evidence from Panel Data,"
19, Deutsche Bank Research.
- Pearce, Douglas K. & Solakoglu, M. Nihat, 2007. "Macroeconomic news and exchange rates," Journal of International Financial Markets, Institutions and Money, Elsevier, vol. 17(4), pages 307-325, October.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Journals Division).
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.