Expert Elicitation Method Selection Process and Method Comparison
AbstractResearch on integrative modeling has gained considerable attention in recent years and expert opinion has been increasingly recognized as an important data source and modeling contributor. However, little research has systematically compared and evaluated expert elicitation methods in terms of their ability to link with computational models that capture human behavior and social phenomena. In this paper, we describe a decision-making process we used for evaluating and selecting a task specific elicitation method within the framework of integrative computational social-behavioral modeling. From the existing literature, we identified the characteristics of problems that each candidate method is well suited to address. A small scale expert elicitation was also conducted to evaluate the comparative strength and weaknesses of the methods against a number of consensus-based decision criteria. By developing a set of explicit method evaluation criteria and a description characterizing decision problems for the candidate methods, we seek to gain a better understanding of the feasibility and costeffectiveness of integrating elicitation methods with computational modeling techniques. This serves an important first step toward expanding our research effort and trajectory toward greater interdisciplinary modeling research of human behavior.
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.
Bibliographic InfoPaper provided by University of Siena in its series Labsi Experimental Economics Laboratory University of Siena with number 030.
Date of creation: Sep 2010
Date of revision:
expert elicitation method.;
Find related papers by JEL classification:
- D90 - Microeconomics - - Intertemporal Choice - - - General
This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:
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.:
- Justin Wolfers & Eric Zitzewitz, 2004.
Journal of Economic Perspectives,
American Economic Association, vol. 18(2), pages 107-126, Spring.
- Justin Wolfers & Eric Zitzewitz, 2004. "Prediction Markets," Discussion Papers 03-025, Stanford Institute for Economic Policy Research.
- Justin Wolfers & Eric Zitzewitz, 2004. "Prediction Markets," NBER Working Papers 10504, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
- Wolfers, Justin & Zitzewitz, Eric, 2004. "Prediction Markets," Working paper 259, Regulation2point0.
- Wolfers, Justin & Zitzewitz, Eric, 2004. "Prediction Markets," Research Papers 1854, Stanford University, Graduate School of Business.
- Dewispelare, Aaron R. & Herren, L. Tandy & Clemen, Robert T., 1995. "The use of probability elicitation in the high-level nuclear waste regulation program," International Journal of Forecasting, Elsevier, vol. 11(1), pages 5-24, March.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Alessandro Innocenti).
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.