Literature DB >> 28154049

Bringing probability judgments into policy debates via forecasting tournaments.

Philip E Tetlock1, Barbara A Mellers2, J Peter Scoblic3.   

Abstract

Political debates often suffer from vague-verbiage predictions that make it difficult to assess accuracy and improve policy. A tournament sponsored by the U.S. intelligence community revealed ways in which forecasters can better use probability estimates to make predictions-even for seemingly "unique" events-and showed that tournaments are a useful tool for generating knowledge. Drawing on the literature about the effects of accountability, the authors suggest that tournaments may hold even greater potential as tools for depolarizing political debates and resolving policy disputes.
Copyright © 2017, American Association for the Advancement of Science.

Year:  2017        PMID: 28154049     DOI: 10.1126/science.aal3147

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Science        ISSN: 0036-8075            Impact factor:   47.728


  5 in total

1.  Psychologists update their beliefs about effect sizes after replication studies.

Authors:  Alex D McDiarmid; Alexa M Tullett; Cassie M Whitt; Simine Vazire; Paul E Smaldino; Jeremy E Stephens
Journal:  Nat Hum Behav       Date:  2021-11-22

2.  Can cancer researchers accurately judge whether preclinical reports will reproduce?

Authors:  Daniel Benjamin; David R Mandel; Jonathan Kimmelman
Journal:  PLoS Biol       Date:  2017-06-29       Impact factor: 8.029

3.  Effects of Choice Restriction on Accuracy and User Experience in an Internet-Based Geopolitical Forecasting Task.

Authors:  Colin L Widmer; Amy Summerville; Ion Juvina; Brandon S Minnery
Journal:  Front Psychol       Date:  2021-07-14

4.  Forecasting success via early adoptions analysis: A data-driven study.

Authors:  Giulio Rossetti; Letizia Milli; Fosca Giannotti; Dino Pedreschi
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2017-12-07       Impact factor: 3.240

5.  Measuring the predictability of life outcomes with a scientific mass collaboration.

Authors:  Matthew J Salganik; Ian Lundberg; Alexander T Kindel; Caitlin E Ahearn; Khaled Al-Ghoneim; Abdullah Almaatouq; Drew M Altschul; Jennie E Brand; Nicole Bohme Carnegie; Ryan James Compton; Debanjan Datta; Thomas Davidson; Anna Filippova; Connor Gilroy; Brian J Goode; Eaman Jahani; Ridhi Kashyap; Antje Kirchner; Stephen McKay; Allison C Morgan; Alex Pentland; Kivan Polimis; Louis Raes; Daniel E Rigobon; Claudia V Roberts; Diana M Stanescu; Yoshihiko Suhara; Adaner Usmani; Erik H Wang; Muna Adem; Abdulla Alhajri; Bedoor AlShebli; Redwane Amin; Ryan B Amos; Lisa P Argyle; Livia Baer-Bositis; Moritz Büchi; Bo-Ryehn Chung; William Eggert; Gregory Faletto; Zhilin Fan; Jeremy Freese; Tejomay Gadgil; Josh Gagné; Yue Gao; Andrew Halpern-Manners; Sonia P Hashim; Sonia Hausen; Guanhua He; Kimberly Higuera; Bernie Hogan; Ilana M Horwitz; Lisa M Hummel; Naman Jain; Kun Jin; David Jurgens; Patrick Kaminski; Areg Karapetyan; E H Kim; Ben Leizman; Naijia Liu; Malte Möser; Andrew E Mack; Mayank Mahajan; Noah Mandell; Helge Marahrens; Diana Mercado-Garcia; Viola Mocz; Katariina Mueller-Gastell; Ahmed Musse; Qiankun Niu; William Nowak; Hamidreza Omidvar; Andrew Or; Karen Ouyang; Katy M Pinto; Ethan Porter; Kristin E Porter; Crystal Qian; Tamkinat Rauf; Anahit Sargsyan; Thomas Schaffner; Landon Schnabel; Bryan Schonfeld; Ben Sender; Jonathan D Tang; Emma Tsurkov; Austin van Loon; Onur Varol; Xiafei Wang; Zhi Wang; Julia Wang; Flora Wang; Samantha Weissman; Kirstie Whitaker; Maria K Wolters; Wei Lee Woon; James Wu; Catherine Wu; Kengran Yang; Jingwen Yin; Bingyu Zhao; Chenyun Zhu; Jeanne Brooks-Gunn; Barbara E Engelhardt; Moritz Hardt; Dean Knox; Karen Levy; Arvind Narayanan; Brandon M Stewart; Duncan J Watts; Sara McLanahan
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  2020-03-30       Impact factor: 11.205

  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.