ARE EXPERTS NO GOOD? (COMMENT) Nick and Dick Weisfelder expressed a skeptical view of the American voter here. I want to point out that there is some evidence that experts do no better than ordinary citizens in making predictions. This essay by Louis Menand discusses Philip Tetlock’s book EXPERT POLITICAL JUDGMENT: HOW GOOD IS IT? HOW CAN WE KNOW? The review discusses various studies which show that college counselors, clinical psychologists and political pundits don’t do any better than anybody else. Tetlock argues that “‘we as a society would be better off if participants in policy debates stated their beliefs in testable formsâ€â€”that is, as probabilities—“monitored their forecasting performance, and honored their reputational bets.’†I argued for greater use of probabilities in discussing policies here and here.
Categories
Archives
Recent Comments
- Gary Nuetzel on THE OLDEST FANTASY BASEBALL LEAGUE STARTS ITS 32ND SEASON. (COMMENT).
- Francesca on EATING PEAS WITH A KNIFE.
- avon wilsmore on CHEATING IN CHAMPIONSHIP BRIDGE.
- Anonymous on THE LANGUAGE WEIRDNESS INDEX.
- James Friscia on THE SECOND OLDEST FANTASY BASEBALL LEAGUE.
- Ken Babcock on THE SECOND OLDEST FANTASY BASEBALL LEAGUE.
- Lickity Splitfingers on THE SECOND OLDEST FANTASY BASEBALL LEAGUE.
- Ken Babcock on THE OLDEST FANTASY BASEBALL LEAGUE STARTS ITS 32ND SEASON. (COMMENT).
- David Quemere on THE OLDEST FANTASY BASEBALL LEAGUE STARTS ITS 32ND SEASON. (COMMENT).
- Nicholas Schaefer on THE SECOND OLDEST FANTASY BASEBALL LEAGUE.
Meta
Predictions and quality of selections are different beasts.
Pingback: EXPERTS PREDICTING WHERE THERE ARE A THOUSAND VARIABLES. | Pater Familias