IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/gro/rugsom/03f12.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Expert judgment versus public opinion - evidence from the Eurovision Song Contest

Author

Listed:
  • Haan, Marco
  • Dijkstra, Gerhard
  • Dijkstra, Peter

    (Groningen University)

Abstract

For centuries, there have been discussions as to whether only experts can judge the quality of cultural output, or whether the taste of the public also has merit. This paper tries to resolve that question empirically, using national finals of the Eurovision Song Contest. We show that experts are better judges of quality: the outcome of finals judged by experts is less sensitive to factors unrelated to quality than the outcome of finals judged by public opinion. Yet, experts are not perfect: their judgment does still depend on such factors. This is also the case in the European finals of the contest.

Suggested Citation

  • Haan, Marco & Dijkstra, Gerhard & Dijkstra, Peter, 2003. "Expert judgment versus public opinion - evidence from the Eurovision Song Contest," Research Report 03F12, University of Groningen, Research Institute SOM (Systems, Organisations and Management).
    • Handle: RePEc:gro:rugsom:03f12
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://irs.ub.rug.nl/ppn/248290312
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Stewart, Jennifer M. & O'Shea, Eamon & Donaldson, Cam & Shackley, Phil, 2002. "Do ordering effects matter in willingness-to-pay studies of health care?," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 21(4), pages 585-599, July.
    2. Victor A. Ginsburgh & Jan C. van Ours, 2003. "Expert Opinion and Compensation: Evidence from a Musical Competition," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 93(1), pages 289-296, March.
    3. Victor Ginsburgh & Sheila Weyers, 1999. "On the Perceived Quality of Movies," Journal of Cultural Economics, Springer;The Association for Cultural Economics International, vol. 23(4), pages 269-283, November.
    4. Vergin, Roger C. & Sosik, John J., 1999. "No place like home: an examination of the home field advantage in gambling strategies in NFL football," Journal of Economics and Business, Elsevier, vol. 51(1), pages 21-31, January.
    5. Victor Ginsburgh, 2003. "Awards, Success and Aesthetic Quality in the Arts," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 17(2), pages 99-111, Spring.
    6. Herbert Glejser & Bruno Heyndels, 2001. "Efficiency and Inefficiency in the Ranking in Competitions: the Case of the Queen Elisabeth Music Contest," Journal of Cultural Economics, Springer;The Association for Cultural Economics International, vol. 25(2), pages 109-129, May.
    7. Nachoem M. Wijnberg & Gerda Gemser, 2000. "Adding Value to Innovation: Impressionism and the Transformation of the Selection System in Visual Arts," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 11(3), pages 323-329, June.
    8. Holbrook, Morris B, 1999. "Popular Appeal versus Expert Judgments of Motion Pictures," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 26(2), pages 144-155, September.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. repec:dgr:rugsom:03f12 is not listed on IDEAS
    2. repec:dgr:rugccs:200305 is not listed on IDEAS
    3. Francesco Angelini & Massimiliano Castellani, 2019. "Cultural and economic value: a critical review," Journal of Cultural Economics, Springer;The Association for Cultural Economics International, vol. 43(2), pages 173-188, June.
    4. Ho Fai Chan & Bruno S. Frey & Jana Gallus & Benno Torgler, 2013. "Does the John Bates Clark Medal boost subsequent productivity and citation success?," ECON - Working Papers 111, Department of Economics - University of Zurich.
    5. Martina Dattilo & Fabio Padovano & Yvon Rocaboy, 2023. "More is worse: the evolution of quality of the UNESCO World Heritage List and its determinants," Journal of Cultural Economics, Springer;The Association for Cultural Economics International, vol. 47(1), pages 71-96, March.
    6. John Ashworth & Bruno Heyndels & Kristien Werck, 2010. "Expert judgements and the demand for novels in Flanders," Journal of Cultural Economics, Springer;The Association for Cultural Economics International, vol. 34(3), pages 197-218, August.
    7. Ho Fai Chan & Bruno S. Frey & Jana Gallus & Benno Torgler, 2013. "Does the John Bates Clark Medal boost subsequent productivity and citation success?," ECON - Working Papers 111, Department of Economics - University of Zurich.
    8. Chan, Ho Fai & Frey, Bruno S. & Gallus, Jana & Torgler, Benno, 2014. "Academic honors and performance," Labour Economics, Elsevier, vol. 31(C), pages 188-204.
    9. Féidhlim P. McGowan, 2024. "The rule of tome? Longer novels are more likely to win literary awards," Journal of Cultural Economics, Springer;The Association for Cultural Economics International, vol. 48(2), pages 311-329, June.
    10. Wallentin, Erik, 2016. "Demand for cinema and diverging tastes of critics and audiences," Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, Elsevier, vol. 33(C), pages 72-81.
    11. Allègre Hadida, 2010. "Commercial success and artistic recognition of motion picture projects," Journal of Cultural Economics, Springer;The Association for Cultural Economics International, vol. 34(1), pages 45-80, February.
    12. Francesco Angelini & Massimiliano Castellani, 2018. "Private pricing in the art market," Economics Bulletin, AccessEcon, vol. 38(4), pages 2371-2378.
    13. Brinja Meiseberg, 2014. "Trust the artist versus trust the tale: performance implications of talent and self-marketing in folk music," Journal of Cultural Economics, Springer;The Association for Cultural Economics International, vol. 38(1), pages 9-42, February.
    14. GINSBURGH, Victor & NOURY, Abdul, 2005. "Cultural voting : The Eurovision Song Contest," LIDAM Discussion Papers CORE 2005006, Université catholique de Louvain, Center for Operations Research and Econometrics (CORE).
    15. Schweizer, T.S., 2002. "Managing interactions between technological and stylistic innovation in the media industries, insights from the introduction of ebook technology in the publishing industry," ERIM Report Series Research in Management ERS-2002-16-ORG, Erasmus Research Institute of Management (ERIM), ERIM is the joint research institute of the Rotterdam School of Management, Erasmus University and the Erasmus School of Economics (ESE) at Erasmus University Rotterdam.
    16. Budzinski, Oliver & Kohlschreiber, Marie & Kuchinke, Björn & Pannicke, Julia, 2019. "Does music quality matter for audience voters in a music contest?," Ilmenau Economics Discussion Papers 122, Ilmenau University of Technology, Institute of Economics.
    17. Victor Ginsburgh & Sheila Weyers, 2008. "Quantitative approaches to valuation in the arts, with an application to movies," ULB Institutional Repository 2013/7292, ULB -- Universite Libre de Bruxelles.
    18. Michela Ponzo & Vincenzo Scoppa, 2015. "Experts’ awards and economic success: evidence from an Italian literary prize," Journal of Cultural Economics, Springer;The Association for Cultural Economics International, vol. 39(4), pages 341-367, November.
    19. Sanne J. Joustra & Ruud H. Koning & Alex Krumer, 2021. "Order Effects in Elite Gymnastics," De Economist, Springer, vol. 169(1), pages 21-35, February.
    20. Victor Ginsburgh, 2016. "On Judging Art and Wine," Working Papers ECARES ECARES 2016-21, ULB -- Universite Libre de Bruxelles.
    21. V. Ginsburgh & Sheila Weyers, 2014. "Nominees, winners, and losers," Journal of Cultural Economics, Springer;The Association for Cultural Economics International, vol. 38(4), pages 291-313, November.
    22. Nicolas G鲡rd Vaillant & François-Charles Wolff, 2013. "Understanding how experts rate cigars: a ‘havanometric’ analysis," Applied Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 45(1), pages 99-109, January.

    More about this item

    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:gro:rugsom:03f12. 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.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc 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 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: Hanneke Tamling (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/ferugnl.html .

    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.