Are markets more accurate than polls? The surprising informational value of “just asking”
Journal Title: Judgment and Decision Making - Year 2019, Vol 14, Issue 2
Abstract
Psychologists typically measure beliefs and preferences using self-reports, whereas economists are much more likely to infer them from behavior. Prediction markets appear to be a victory for the economic approach, having yielded more accurate probability estimates than opinion polls or experts for a wide variety of events, all without ever asking for self-reported beliefs. We conduct the most direct comparison to date of prediction markets to simple self-reports using a within-subject design. Our participants traded on the likelihood of geopolitical events. Each time they placed a trade, they first had to report their belief that the event would occur on a 0–100 scale. When previously validated aggregation algorithms were applied to self-reported beliefs, they were at least as accurate as prediction-market prices in predicting a wide range of geopolitical events. Furthermore, the combination of approaches was significantly more accurate than prediction-market prices alone, indicating that self-reports contained information that the market did not efficiently aggregate. Combining measurement techniques across behavioral and social sciences may have greater benefits than previously thought.
Authors and Affiliations
Jason Dana, Pavel Atanasov, Philip Tetlock and Barbara Mellers
Keywords
Related Articles
- EP ID EP678405
- DOI -
- Views 140
- Downloads 0
When imagining future wealth influences risky decision making
The body of literature on the relationship between risk aversion and wealth is extensive. However, little attention has been given to examining how future realizations of wealth might affect (current) risk decisions. Usi...
The combined role of task, child’s age and individual differences in understanding decision processes
It is important to understand the impact of individual differences in decision making from childhood to adulthood. This cohort-based study extends our knowledge by comparing decision making of children across the age ran...
Spontaneous associations and label framing have similar effects in the public goods game
It is known that presentation of a meaningful label (e.g., "The Teamwork Game") can influence decisions in economic games. A common view is that such labels cue associations to preexisting mental models of situations, a...
The persistence of common-ratio effects in multiple-play decisions
People often make more rational choices between monetary prospects when their choices will be played out many times rather than just once. For example, previous research has shown that the certainty effect and the possib...
Salient nutrition labels increase the integration of health attributes in food decision-making
Every day, people struggle to make healthy eating decisions. Nutrition labels have been used to help people properly balance the tradeoff between healthiness and taste, but research suggests that these labels vary in the...