IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/pra/mprapa/4663.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Methods to Elicit Forecasts from Groups: Delphi and Prediction Markets Compared

Author

Listed:
  • Green, Kesten C.
  • Armstrong, J. Scott
  • Graefe, Andreas

Abstract

Traditional groups meetings are an inefficient and ineffective method for making forecasts and decisions. We compare two structured alternatives to traditional meetings: the Delphi technique and prediction markets. Delphi is relatively simple and cheap to implement and has been adopted for diverse applications in business and government since its origins in the 1950s. It can be used for nearly any forecasting, estimation, or decision making problem not barred by complexity or ignorance. While prediction markets were used more than a century ago, their popularity waned until more recent times. As a consequence there is less evidence on their validity. Prediction markets need many participants. They need clear outcomes in order to determine participants’ pay-offs. Even so, relating their knowledge to market prices is not intuitive to everyone and constructing contracts that will provide a useful forecast may not be possible for some problems. It is difficult to maintain confidentiality with markets and they are vulnerable to manipulation. Delphi is designed to reveal panelists’ knowledge and opinions via their forecasts and the reasoning they provide. This format allows testing of knowledge and learning by panelists as they refine their forecasts. Such a process does not happen explicitly in prediction markets and may not happen at all. The reasoning provided as an output of the Delphi process is likely to be reassuring to forecast users who are uncomfortable with the “black box” nature of prediction markets. We consider that, half a century after its original development, Delphi is greatly under-utilized.

Suggested Citation

  • Green, Kesten C. & Armstrong, J. Scott & Graefe, Andreas, 2007. "Methods to Elicit Forecasts from Groups: Delphi and Prediction Markets Compared," MPRA Paper 4663, University Library of Munich, Germany.
  • Handle: RePEc:pra:mprapa:4663
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://mpra.ub.uni-muenchen.de/4663/1/MPRA_paper_4663.pdf
    File Function: original version
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://mpra.ub.uni-muenchen.de/4999/1/MPRA_paper_4999.pdf
    File Function: revised version
    Download Restriction: no

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Kesten C. Green & J. Scott Armstrong, 2004. "Value of Expertise For Forecasting Decisions in Conflicts," Monash Econometrics and Business Statistics Working Papers 27/04, Monash University, Department of Econometrics and Business Statistics.
    2. Paul W. Rhode & Koleman S. Strumpf, 2004. "Historical Presidential Betting Markets," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 18(2), pages 127-141, Spring.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

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


    Cited by:

    1. repec:gam:jsusta:v:8:y:2016:i:2:p:177:d:64176 is not listed on IDEAS
    2. Graefe, Andreas & Armstrong, J. Scott, 2011. "Comparing face-to-face meetings, nominal groups, Delphi and prediction markets on an estimation task," International Journal of Forecasting, Elsevier, vol. 27(1), pages 183-195, January.
    3. Robert J. MacCoun, 2010. "Comment on "Rethinking America's Illegal Drug Policy"," NBER Chapters,in: Controlling Crime: Strategies and Tradeoffs, pages 281-289 National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    4. Liu, Yaqin & Zhao, Guohao & Zhao, Yushan, 2016. "An analysis of Chinese provincial carbon dioxide emission efficiencies based on energy consumption structure," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 96(C), pages 524-533.
    5. Goodwin, Paul & Meeran, Sheik & Dyussekeneva, Karima, 2014. "The challenges of pre-launch forecasting of adoption time series for new durable products," International Journal of Forecasting, Elsevier, vol. 30(4), pages 1082-1097.
    6. repec:gam:jsusta:v:7:y:2015:i:12:p:16720-16736:d:60832 is not listed on IDEAS
    7. Kerr, Norbert L. & Tindale, R. Scott, 2011. "Group-based forecasting?: A social psychological analysis," International Journal of Forecasting, Elsevier, vol. 27(1), pages 14-40, January.
    8. Maria Jose Marques & Gudrun Schwilch & Nina Lauterburg & Stephen Crittenden & Mehreteab Tesfai & Jannes Stolte & Pandi Zdruli & Claudio Zucca & Thorunn Petursdottir & Niki Evelpidou & Anna Karkani & Y, 2016. "Multifaceted Impacts of Sustainable Land Management in Drylands: A Review," Sustainability, MDPI, Open Access Journal, vol. 8(2), pages 1-34, February.
    9. Kerr, Norbert L. & Tindale, R. Scott, 2011. "Group-based forecasting?: A social psychological analysis," International Journal of Forecasting, Elsevier, vol. 27(1), pages 14-40.
    10. Keyvanfar, Ali & Shafaghat, Arezou & Abd Majid, Muhd Zaimi & Bin Lamit, Hasanuddin & Warid Hussin, Mohd & Binti Ali, Kherun Nita & Dhafer Saad, Alshahri, 2014. "User satisfaction adaptive behaviors for assessing energy efficient building indoor cooling and lighting environment," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 39(C), pages 277-295.
    11. repec:eee:tefoso:v:126:y:2018:i:c:p:194-206 is not listed on IDEAS
    12. Ricardo Gomes & Alfeu Marques & Joaquim Sousa, 2013. "District Metered Areas Design Under Different Decision Makers’ Options: Cost Analysis," Water Resources Management: An International Journal, Published for the European Water Resources Association (EWRA), Springer;European Water Resources Association (EWRA), vol. 27(13), pages 4527-4543, October.
    13. Palma, David & Dios Ortuzar, Juan de & Casaubon, Gerard & Rizzi, Luis I. & Agosin, Eduardo, 2013. "Measuring consumer preferences using hybrid discrete choice models," Working Papers 164855, American Association of Wine Economists.
    14. Lang, Mark & Bharadwaj, Neeraj & Di Benedetto, C. Anthony, 2016. "How crowdsourcing improves prediction of market-oriented outcomes," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 69(10), pages 4168-4176.
    15. Robert Reig & Ramona Schoder, 2010. "Forecasting Accuracy: Comparing Prediction Markets And Surveys – An Experimental Study," Journal of Prediction Markets, University of Buckingham Press, vol. 4(3), pages 1-19.
    16. Soyeon Caren Han & Yulu Liang & Hyunsuk Chung & Hyejin Kim & Byeong Ho Kang, 2016. "Chinese trending search terms popularity rank prediction," Information Technology and Management, Springer, vol. 17(2), pages 133-139, June.
    17. Sungchul Kim & Dongsik Jang & Sunghae Jun & Sangsung Park, 2015. "A Novel Forecasting Methodology for Sustainable Management of Defense Technology," Sustainability, MDPI, Open Access Journal, vol. 7(12), pages 1-17, December.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    accuracy; forecasting methods; groups; judgment; meetings; structure;

    JEL classification:

    • C88 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Data Collection and Data Estimation Methodology; Computer Programs - - - Other Computer Software
    • D84 - Microeconomics - - Information, Knowledge, and Uncertainty - - - Expectations; Speculations
    • C42 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Econometric and Statistical Methods: Special Topics - - - Survey Methods
    • D82 - Microeconomics - - Information, Knowledge, and Uncertainty - - - Asymmetric and Private Information; Mechanism Design
    • C49 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Econometric and Statistical Methods: Special Topics - - - Other
    • C44 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Econometric and Statistical Methods: Special Topics - - - Operations Research; Statistical Decision Theory
    • D81 - Microeconomics - - Information, Knowledge, and Uncertainty - - - Criteria for Decision-Making under Risk and Uncertainty
    • D83 - Microeconomics - - Information, Knowledge, and Uncertainty - - - Search; Learning; Information and Knowledge; Communication; Belief; Unawareness

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    Lists

    This item is featured on the following reading lists or Wikipedia pages:
    1. Technology Assessment

    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:pra:mprapa:4663. 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: (Joachim Winter) or (Rebekah McClure). General contact details of provider: http://edirc.repec.org/data/vfmunde.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.

    If CitEc recognized a 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.

    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.