Value of Expertise For Forecasting Decisions in Conflicts
Abstract
In important conflicts, people typically rely on experts' judgments to predict the decisions that adversaries will make. We compared the accuracy of 106 expert and 169 novice forecasts for eight real conflicts. The forecasts of experts using unaided judgment were little better than those of novices, and neither were much better than simply guessing. The forecasts of experts with more experience were no more accurate than those with less. Speculating that consideration of the relative frequency of decisions might improve accuracy, we obtained 89 forecasts from novices instructed to assume there were 100 similar situations and to ascribe frequencies to decisions. Their forecasts were no more accurate than 96 forecasts from novices asked to pick the most likely decision. We conclude that expert judgment should not be used for predicting decisions that people will make in conflicts. Their use might lead decision makers to overlook other, more useful, approaches.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.Bibliographic Info
Paper provided by Monash University, Department of Econometrics and Business Statistics in its series Monash Econometrics and Business Statistics Working Papers with number 27/04.Length: 9 pages
Date of creation: Dec 2004
Date of revision:
Handle: RePEc:msh:ebswps:2004-27
Contact details of provider:
Postal: PO Box 11E, Monash University, Victoria 3800, Australia
Phone: +61-3-9905-2489
Fax: +61-3-9905-5474
Email:
Web page: http://www.buseco.monash.edu.au/depts/ebs/
More information through EDIRC
Order Information:
Email:
Web: http://www.buseco.monash.edu.au/depts/ebs/pubs/wpapers/
Related research
Keywords: Bad faith; Framing; Hindsight bias; Methods; Politics.;Find related papers by JEL classification:
- D74 - Microeconomics - - Analysis of Collective Decision-Making - - - Conflict; Conflict Resolution; Alliances
- D78 - Microeconomics - - Analysis of Collective Decision-Making - - - Positive Analysis of Policy-Making and Implementation
- D81 - Microeconomics - - Information, Knowledge, and Uncertainty - - - Criteria for Decision-Making under Risk and Uncertainty
- D83 - Microeconomics - - Information, Knowledge, and Uncertainty - - - Search, Learning, and Information
- D84 - Microeconomics - - Information, Knowledge, and Uncertainty - - - Expectations; Speculations
This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:
- NEP-ALL-2004-12-20 (All new papers)
- NEP-MIC-2004-12-20 (Microeconomics)
- NEP-POL-2004-12-20 (Positive Political Economics)
References
References listed on IDEASPlease 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.:
- Scott Armstrong, J. & Brodie, Roderick J. & McIntyre, Shelby H., 1987. "Forecasting methods for marketing: Review of empirical research," International Journal of Forecasting, Elsevier, vol. 3(3-4), pages 355-376.
- J. S. Armstrong & R. Brodie & S. McIntyre, 2005. "Forecasting Methods for Marketing:* Review of Empirical Research," General Economics and Teaching 0502023, EconWPA.
- JS Armstrong, 2004. "The Seer-Sucker Theory: The Value of Experts in Forecasting," General Economics and Teaching 0412009, EconWPA.
Citations
Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.Cited by:
- Kesten C. Green & J. Scott Armstrong, 2004.
"Structured analogies for forecasting,"
Monash Econometrics and Business Statistics Working Papers
17/04, Monash University, Department of Econometrics and Business Statistics.
- Green, Kesten C. & Armstrong, J. Scott, 2007. "Structured analogies for forecasting," International Journal of Forecasting, Elsevier, vol. 23(3), pages 365-376.
- J.S. Armstrong, 2005. "Structured Analogies for Forecasting," General Economics and Teaching 0502001, EconWPA.
- Green, Kesten C. & Armstrong, J. Scott & Graefe, Andreas, 2007.
"Methods to Elicit Forecasts from Groups: Delphi and Prediction Markets Compared,"
MPRA Paper
4663, University Library of Munich, Germany.
- Kesten Green & J. Scott Armstrong & Andreas Graefe, 2007. "Methods to Elicit Forecasts from Groups: Delphi and Prediction Markets Compared," Foresight: The International Journal of Applied Forecasting, International Institute of Forecasters, issue 8, pages 17-20, Fall.
- Green, Kesten C., 2005. "Game theory, simulated interaction, and unaided judgement for forecasting decisions in conflicts: Further evidence," International Journal of Forecasting, Elsevier, vol. 21(3), pages 463-472.
- J. Scott Armstrong & Kesten C. Green, 2005. "Demand Forecasting: Evidence-based Methods," Monash Econometrics and Business Statistics Working Papers 24/05, Monash University, Department of Econometrics and Business Statistics.
- Green, Kesten C., 2008. "Assessing probabilistic forecasts about particular situations," MPRA Paper 8836, University Library of Munich, Germany.
- Green, Kesten C. & Armstrong, J. Scott, 2011.
"Role thinking: Standing in other people's shoes to forecast decisions in conflicts,"
International Journal of Forecasting,
Elsevier, vol. 27(1), pages 69-80, January.
- Green, Kesten C. & Armstrong, J. Scott, 2011. "Role thinking: Standing in other people’s shoes to forecast decisions in conflicts," International Journal of Forecasting, Elsevier, vol. 27(1), pages 69-80.
- Green, Kesten C. & Armstrong, J. Scott, 2009. "Role thinking: Standing in other people’s shoes to forecast decisions in conflicts," MPRA Paper 16422, University Library of Munich, Germany.
Lists
This item is featured on the following reading lists or Wikipedia pages:Statistics
Access and download statisticsCorrections
When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:msh:ebswps:2004-27For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Simone Grose).
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.

