IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/inm/ormnsc/v31y1985i12p1499-1508.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Aggregating Subjective Forecasts: Some Empirical Results

Author

Listed:
  • Alison Hubbard Ashton

    (Graduate School of Business Administration, New York University, New York, New York 10006)

  • Robert H. Ashton

    (Graduate School of Business Administration, New York University, New York, New York 10006)

Abstract

The impact on forecast accuracy of aggregating the subjective forecasts of up to 13 individuals was examined for five forecast weighting methods---equal weighting, two ex post methods that took advantage of prior information about the individuals' relative accuracy, and two ex ante methods based on objective and subjective assessments of relative accuracy. The individuals were executives, managers and sales personnel employed by Time. Inc., and the variable forecasted was the number of advertising pages sold annually by Time magazine over a 14-year period. The results show that both the average forecast error and the variance of the error decrease as additional individuals' forecasts are included in the aggregate. Only two to five individuals' forecasts must be included to achieve much of the total improvement available from combining all 13 forecasts. Three of the differential weighting methods produced more accurate forecasts than equal weighting, but the magnitude of the improvement was small. Implications for realistic forecasting situations are discussed, as are conditions under which the use of aggregates seems attractive.

Suggested Citation

  • Alison Hubbard Ashton & Robert H. Ashton, 1985. "Aggregating Subjective Forecasts: Some Empirical Results," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 31(12), pages 1499-1508, December.
  • Handle: RePEc:inm:ormnsc:v:31:y:1985:i:12:p:1499-1508
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.31.12.1499
    Download Restriction: no

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Ian I. Mitroff, 1972. "The Myth of Objectivity OR Why Science Needs a New Psychology of Science," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 18(10), pages 613-618, June.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    More about this item

    Keywords

    forecasting: applications;

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:inm:ormnsc:v:31:y:1985:i:12:p:1499-1508. 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: (Mirko Janc). General contact details of provider: http://edirc.repec.org/data/inforea.html .

    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.

    We have no references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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.

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

    IDEAS is a RePEc service hosted by the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis . RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.