Advanced Search
MyIDEAS: Login to save this paper or follow this series

Are all crowds equally wise? A comparison of political election forecasts by experts and the public

Contents:

Author Info

  • Sjöberg, Lennart

    ()
    (Center for Risk Research)

Registered author(s):

    Abstract

    Four groups made forecasts of the outcome of the Swedish Parliamentary election in the fall of 2006. They consisted of members of the public, political scientists, journalists writing about domestic politics in Swedish daily newspapers, and journalists who were editing sections of readers’ letters in daily newspapers. They estimated, using a 12-step category scale, which percentage of the votes that they believed 7 parties would get in the election. Data were then obtained on the outcome of the election, and on the two opinions polls closest in time to it. When median forecast were compared across groups, it was found that the group from the public was most successful in forecasting the outcome of the election. This was in spite of the fact that the median error made by individual members of that group was about 50 percent larger than the median error made by members of other groups. The two polls were less efficient than the group from the public and overestimated the span between the incumbent government and the opposition by a factor of 2. The members of the public and journalists showed some wishful thinking in their forecasts. There were large and consistent individual differences in forecasting ability. Men performed better than women, as did those who expressed more interest and knowledge in politics.

    Download Info

    If 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.
    File URL: http://swoba.hhs.se/hastba/papers/hastba2006_009.pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    Bibliographic Info

    Paper provided by Stockholm School of Economics in its series Working Paper Series in Business Administration with number 2006:9.

    as in new window
    Length: 32 pages
    Date of creation: 03 Oct 2006
    Date of revision: 04 Oct 2006
    Publication status: Forthcoming in Journal of Forecasting.
    Handle: RePEc:hhb:hastba:2006_009

    Contact details of provider:
    Postal: The Economic Research Institute, Stockholm School of Economics, P.O. Box 6501, SE 113 83 Stockholm, Sweden
    Phone: +46-(0)8-736 90 00
    Fax: +46-(0)8-31 01 57
    Email:
    Web page: http://www.hhs.se/
    More information through EDIRC

    Related research

    Keywords: election forecast; experts; opinion polls;

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    References

    References listed on IDEAS
    Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:
    as in new window
    1. Wolfers, Justin & Zitzewitz, Eric, 2004. "Prediction Markets," Research Papers 1854, Stanford University, Graduate School of Business.
    2. Andrew Leigh & Justin Wolfers, 2005. "Competing Approaches to Forecasting Elections: Economic Models, Opinion Polling and Prediction Markets," CEPR Discussion Papers 502, Centre for Economic Policy Research, Research School of Economics, Australian National University.
    3. Lewis-Beck, Michael S. & Tien, Charles, 1999. "Voters as forecasters: a micromodel of election prediction," International Journal of Forecasting, Elsevier, vol. 15(2), pages 175-184, April.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Lists

    This item is not listed on Wikipedia, on a reading list or among the top items on IDEAS.

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:hhb:hastba:2006_009. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Helena Lundin).

    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 references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.

    If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link 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 profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

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