IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/wly/jforec/v34y2015i4p290-302.html

Does Disagreement Amongst Forecasters Have Predictive Value?

Author

Listed:
  • Rianne Legerstee
  • Philip Hans Franses

Abstract

This discussion paper has led to a publication in 'Journal of Forecasting' , 2015, 34(4), 290-302. Forecasts from various experts are often used in macroeconomic forecasting models. Usually the focus is on the mean or median of the survey data. In the present study we adopt a different perspective on the survey data as we examine the predictive power of disagreement amongst forecasters. The premise is that this variable could signal upcoming structural or temporal changes in an economic process or in the predictive power of the survey forecasts. In our empirical work, we examine a variety of macroeconomic variables, and we use different measurements for the degree of disagreement, together with measures for location of the survey data and autoregressive components. Forecasts from simple linear models and forecasts from Markov regime-switching models with constant and with time-varying transition probabilities are constructed in real-time and compared on forecast accuracy. We find that disagreement has predictive power indeed and that this variable can be used to improve forecasts when used in Markov regime-switching models.
(This abstract was borrowed from another version of this item.)

Suggested Citation

  • Rianne Legerstee & Philip Hans Franses, 2015. "Does Disagreement Amongst Forecasters Have Predictive Value?," Journal of Forecasting, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 34(4), pages 290-302, July.
    • Handle: RePEc:wly:jforec:v:34:y:2015:i:4:p:290-302
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    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. Philip Hans Franses, 2021. "Modeling Judgment in Macroeconomic Forecasts," Journal of Quantitative Economics, Springer;The Indian Econometric Society (TIES), vol. 19(1), pages 401-417, December.
    2. Nautz, Dieter & Pagenhardt, Laura & Strohsal, Till, 2017. "The (de-)anchoring of inflation expectations: New evidence from the euro area," The North American Journal of Economics and Finance, Elsevier, vol. 40(C), pages 103-115.
    3. Badarinza, Cristian & Gross, Marco, 2011. "Macroeconomic vulnerability and disagreement in expectations," Working Paper Series 1407, European Central Bank.
    4. repec:amu:wpaper:2013-04 is not listed on IDEAS
    5. Philip Hans Franses & Max Welz, 2022. "Evaluating heterogeneous forecasts for vintages of macroeconomic variables," Journal of Forecasting, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 41(4), pages 829-839, July.
    6. Franses, Ph.H.B.F., 2019. "Professional Forecasters and January," Econometric Institute Research Papers EI2019-25, Erasmus University Rotterdam, Erasmus School of Economics (ESE), Econometric Institute.
    7. repec:hum:wpaper:sfb649dp2015-044 is not listed on IDEAS
    8. Félix, Luiz & Kräussl, Roman & Stork, Philip, 2018. "Predictable biases in macroeconomic forecasts and their impact across asset classes," CFS Working Paper Series 596, Center for Financial Studies (CFS).
    9. Luiz Félix & Roman Kräussl & Philip Stork, 2021. "Strategic bias and popularity effect in the prediction of economic surprises," Journal of Forecasting, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 40(6), pages 1095-1117, September.
    10. Philip Hans Franses, 2020. "Correcting the January optimism effect," Journal of Forecasting, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 39(6), pages 927-933, September.
    11. Franses, Ph.H.B.F. & Maassen, N.R., 2015. "Consensus forecasters: How good are they individually and why?," Econometric Institute Research Papers EI2015-21, Erasmus University Rotterdam, Erasmus School of Economics (ESE), Econometric Institute.

    More about this item

    JEL classification:

    • 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:wly:jforec:v:34:y:2015:i:4:p:290-302. 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: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www3.interscience.wiley.com/cgi-bin/jhome/2966 .

    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.