IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/jbrese/v68y2015i8p1702-1704.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The golden rule of forecasting: Objections, refinements, and enhancements

Author

Listed:
  • Soyer, Emre
  • Hogarth, Robin M.

Abstract

In providing a “golden rule” for forecasting, Armstrong, Green, and Graefe (this issue) raise aspirations that reliable forecasting is possible. They advocate a conservative approach that mainly involves extrapolating from the present. We comment on three issues that relate to their proposed Golden Rule: its scope of application, the importance of highly improbable events, and the challenges of communicating forecasts.

Suggested Citation

  • Soyer, Emre & Hogarth, Robin M., 2015. "The golden rule of forecasting: Objections, refinements, and enhancements," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 68(8), pages 1702-1704.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:jbrese:v:68:y:2015:i:8:p:1702-1704
    DOI: 10.1016/j.jbusres.2015.03.029
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0148296315001435
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.jbusres.2015.03.029?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Hogarth, Robin M. & Soyer, Emre, 2015. "Communicating forecasts: The simplicity of simulated experience," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 68(8), pages 1800-1809.
    2. Robin M. Hogarth & Natalia Karelaia, 2006. "Regions of Rationality: Maps for Bounded Agents," Decision Analysis, INFORMS, vol. 3(3), pages 124-144, September.
    3. Soyer, Emre & Hogarth, Robin M., 2012. "The illusion of predictability: How regression statistics mislead experts," International Journal of Forecasting, Elsevier, vol. 28(3), pages 695-711.
    4. Daniel G. Goldstein & Eric J. Johnson & William F. Sharpe, 2008. "Choosing Outcomes versus Choosing Products: Consumer-Focused Retirement Investment Advice," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 35(3), pages 440-456, August.
    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. López Menéndez, Ana Jesús & Pérez Suárez, Rigoberto, 2017. "Forecasting Performance and Information Measures. Revisiting the M-Competition /Evaluación de Predicciones y Medidas de Información. Reexamen de la M-Competición," Estudios de Economia Aplicada, Estudios de Economia Aplicada, vol. 35, pages 299-314, Mayo.
    2. Green, Kesten C. & Armstrong, J. Scott & Graefe, Andreas, 2015. "Golden rule of forecasting rearticulated: Forecast unto others as you would have them forecast unto you," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 68(8), pages 1768-1771.

    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. Green, Kesten C. & Armstrong, J. Scott, 2015. "Simple versus complex forecasting: The evidence," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 68(8), pages 1678-1685.
    2. Hogarth, Robin M. & Soyer, Emre, 2015. "Communicating forecasts: The simplicity of simulated experience," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 68(8), pages 1800-1809.
    3. Armstrong, J. Scott & Green, Kesten C. & Graefe, Andreas, 2015. "Golden rule of forecasting: Be conservative," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 68(8), pages 1717-1731.
    4. Gianluigi Guido & Cesare Amatulli & Andrea Sestino, 2020. "Elderly consumers and financial choices: A systematic review," Journal of Financial Services Marketing, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 25(3), pages 76-85, December.
    5. Hoffmann, Arvid O.I. & Post, Thomas, 2014. "Self-attribution bias in consumer financial decision-making: How investment returns affect individuals’ belief in skill," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 52(C), pages 23-28.
    6. Bernard, Carole & Chen, Jit Seng & Vanduffel, Steven, 2015. "Rationalizing investors’ choices," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 59(C), pages 10-23.
    7. Pantelis P. Analytis & Amit Kothiyal & Konstantinos Katsikopoulos, 2014. "Multi-attribute utility models as cognitive search engines," Judgment and Decision Making, Society for Judgment and Decision Making, vol. 9(5), pages 403-419, September.
    8. Dennis Vrecko & Thomas Langer, 2013. "What Are Investors Willing to Pay to Customize Their Investment Product?," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 59(8), pages 1855-1870, August.
    9. Carole Bernard & Jit Seng Chen & Steven Vanduffel, 2014. "Optimal portfolios under worst-case scenarios," Quantitative Finance, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 14(4), pages 657-671, April.
    10. Glenn W. Harrison & Morten I. Lau & Hong Il Yoo, 2020. "Risk Attitudes, Sample Selection, and Attrition in a Longitudinal Field Experiment," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 102(3), pages 552-568, July.
    11. Felix Holzmeister & Jürgen Huber & Michael Kirchler & Florian Lindner & Utz Weitzel & Stefan Zeisberger, 2020. "What Drives Risk Perception? A Global Survey with Financial Professionals and Laypeople," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 66(9), pages 3977-4002, September.
    12. repec:cup:judgdm:v:9:y:2014:i:5:p:403-419 is not listed on IDEAS
    13. Mridu Prabal Goswami & Manipushpak Mitra & Debapriya Sen, 2022. "A Characterization of Lexicographic Preferences," Decision Analysis, INFORMS, vol. 19(2), pages 170-187, June.
    14. Andraszewicz, Sandra & Friedman, Jason & Kaszás, Dániel & Hölscher, Christoph, 2023. "Zurich Trading Simulator (ZTS) — A dynamic trading experimental tool for oTree," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Finance, Elsevier, vol. 37(C).
    15. Theodore G. Shepherd & Emily Boyd & Raphael A. Calel & Sandra C. Chapman & Suraje Dessai & Ioana M. Dima-West & Hayley J. Fowler & Rachel James & Douglas Maraun & Olivia Martius & Catherine A. Senior , 2018. "Storylines: an alternative approach to representing uncertainty in physical aspects of climate change," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 151(3), pages 555-571, December.
    16. Bateman, Hazel & Ebling, Christine & Geweke, John & Jordan, Louviere & Stephen, Satchell & Susan, Thorp, 2011. "Economic Rationality, Risk Presentation, and Retirement Portfolio Choice," MPRA Paper 29371, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    17. Donkers, A.C.D. & Lourenço, C.J.S. & Dellaert, B.G.C. & Goldstein, D.G., 2013. "Using Preferred Outcome Distributions to Estimate Value and Probability Weighting Functions in Decisions under Risk," ERIM Report Series Research in Management ERS-2013-005-MKT, 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.
    18. Armstrong, J. Scott, 2011. "Illusions in Regression Analysis," MPRA Paper 81663, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    19. Lionel Page & Daniel G. Goldstein, 2016. "Subjective beliefs about the income distribution and preferences for redistribution," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 47(1), pages 25-61, June.
    20. Thomas Rouyard & Yukichi Mano & Bocar Mamadou Daff & Serigne Diouf & Khadidiatou Fall Dia & Laetitia Duval & Josselin Thuilliez & Ryota Nakamura, 2022. "Operational and Structural Factors Influencing Enrolment in Community-Based Health Insurance Schemes: An Observational Study Using 12 Waves of Nationwide Panel Data from Senegal," Université Paris1 Panthéon-Sorbonne (Post-Print and Working Papers) halshs-03641124, HAL.
    21. Manel Baucells & Juan A. Carrasco & Robin M. Hogarth, 2008. "Cumulative Dominance and Heuristic Performance in Binary Multiattribute Choice," Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 56(5), pages 1289-1304, October.

    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:eee:jbrese:v:68:y:2015:i:8:p:1702-1704. 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: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/jbusres .

    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.