IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/ucp/jnlbus/v51y1978i4p549-64.html

Forecasting with Econometric Methods: Folklore versus Fact

Author

Listed:
  • Armstrong, J Scott

Abstract

Evidence from social psychology suggests that econometricians will avoid evidence that disconfirms their beliefs. Two beliefs of econometricians were examined: (1) Econometric methods provide more accurate short-term forecasts than do other methods; and (2) more complex econometric methods yield more accurate forecasts. A survey of 21 experts in econometrics found that 95% agreed with the first statement and 72% agreed with the second. A review of the published empirical evidence yielded little support for either of the two statements in the 41 studies. The method of multiple hypotheses was suggested as a research strategy that will lead to more effective use of disconfirming evidence. Although this strategy was suggested in 1890, it has only recently been used by econometricians.
(This abstract was borrowed from another version of this item.)

Suggested Citation

  • Armstrong, J Scott, 1978. "Forecasting with Econometric Methods: Folklore versus Fact," The Journal of Business, University of Chicago Press, vol. 51(4), pages 549-564, October.
    • Handle: RePEc:ucp:jnlbus:v:51:y:1978:i:4:p:549-64
    DOI: 10.1086/296016
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.1086/296016
    File Function: full text
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to JSTOR subscribers. See http://www.jstor.org for details.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1086/296016?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to look for a different version below or

    for a different version of it.

    Other versions of this item:

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Simon Glöser-Chahoud & Johannes Hartwig & I. David Wheat & Martin Faulstich, 2016. "The cobweb theorem and delays in adjusting supply in metals' markets," System Dynamics Review, System Dynamics Society, vol. 32(3-4), pages 279-308, July.
    2. Green, Kesten C. & Armstrong, J. Scott, 2015. "Simple versus complex forecasting: The evidence," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 68(8), pages 1678-1685.
    3. Scott Moss & Bruce Edmonds & Steve Wallis, 1997. "Validation and Verification of Computational Models with Multiple Cognitive Agents," Discussion Papers 97-25, Manchester Metropolitan University, Centre for Policy Modelling.
    4. J. Scott Armstrong, 1984. "Forecasting by Extrapolation: Conclusions from 25 Years of Research," Interfaces, INFORMS, vol. 14(6), pages 52-66, December.
    5. Afshin Amiraslany & Hari S. Luitel & Gerry J. Mahar, 2019. "Structural Breaks, Biased Estimations, and Forecast Errors in a GDP Series of Canada versus the United States," International Advances in Economic Research, Springer;International Atlantic Economic Society, vol. 25(2), pages 235-244, May.
    6. Armstrong, J. Scott, 1983. "Strategic Planning and Forecasting Fundamentals," MPRA Paper 81682, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    7. Colin Small & J. Eric Bickel, 2022. "Model Complexity and Accuracy: A COVID-19 Case Study," Decision Analysis, INFORMS, vol. 19(4), pages 354-383, December.
    8. Armstrong, J. Scott & Green, Kesten C. & Graefe, Andreas, 2015. "Golden rule of forecasting: Be conservative," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 68(8), pages 1717-1731.
    9. Ashish Sood & Gareth M. James & Gerard J. Tellis, 2009. "Functional Regression: A New Model for Predicting Market Penetration of New Products," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 28(1), pages 36-51, 01-02.
    10. Crystal C. Hall & Daniel M. Oppenheimer, 2015. "Error Parsing: An alternative method of implementing social judgment theory," Judgment and Decision Making, Society for Judgment and Decision Making, vol. 10(5), pages 469-478, September.

    More about this item

    JEL classification:

    • B23 - Schools of Economic Thought and Methodology - - History of Economic Thought since 1925 - - - Econometrics; Quantitative and Mathematical Studies
    • C01 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - General - - - Econometrics
    • C53 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Econometric Modeling - - - Forecasting and Prediction Models; Simulation Methods

    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:ucp:jnlbus:v:51:y:1978:i:4:p:549-64. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    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 bibliographic 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.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Journals Division (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.jstor.org/journal/jbusiness .

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

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.