IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/wly/fufsci/v2y2020i3-4ne39.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Studies past and future of the past and future: Commentary on Schoemaker 2020

Author

Listed:
  • David R. Mandel

Abstract

No abstract is available for this item.

Suggested Citation

  • David R. Mandel, 2020. "Studies past and future of the past and future: Commentary on Schoemaker 2020," Futures & Foresight Science, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 2(3-4), September.
    • Handle: RePEc:wly:fufsci:v:2:y:2020:i:3-4:n:e39
    DOI: 10.1002/ffo2.39
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1002/ffo2.39
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1002/ffo2.39?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
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Victor Richmond R. Jose & Robert F. Nau & Robert L. Winkler, 2009. "Sensitivity to Distance and Baseline Distributions in Forecast Evaluation," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 55(4), pages 582-590, April.
    2. Christopher W. Karvetski & Kenneth C. Olson & David R. Mandel & Charles R. Twardy, 2013. "Probabilistic Coherence Weighting for Optimizing Expert Forecasts," Decision Analysis, INFORMS, vol. 10(4), pages 305-326, December.
    3. Gneiting, Tilmann & Raftery, Adrian E., 2007. "Strictly Proper Scoring Rules, Prediction, and Estimation," Journal of the American Statistical Association, American Statistical Association, vol. 102, pages 359-378, March.
    4. Yuyu Fan & David V. Budescu & David Mandel & Mark Himmelstein, 2019. "Improving Accuracy by Coherence Weighting of Direct and Ratio Probability Judgments," Decision Analysis, INFORMS, vol. 16(3), pages 197-217, September.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Christopher W. Karvetski & David R. Mandel & Daniel Irwin, 2020. "Improving Probability Judgment in Intelligence Analysis: From Structured Analysis to Statistical Aggregation," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 40(5), pages 1040-1057, May.
    2. Wheatcroft Edward, 2021. "Evaluating probabilistic forecasts of football matches: the case against the ranked probability score," Journal of Quantitative Analysis in Sports, De Gruyter, vol. 17(4), pages 273-287, December.
    3. Constantinou Anthony Costa & Fenton Norman Elliott, 2012. "Solving the Problem of Inadequate Scoring Rules for Assessing Probabilistic Football Forecast Models," Journal of Quantitative Analysis in Sports, De Gruyter, vol. 8(1), pages 1-14, March.
    4. Wheatcroft, Edward, 2021. "Evaluating probabilistic forecasts of football matches: the case against the ranked probability score," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 111494, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    5. Christopher W. Karvetski & David R. Mandel, 2020. "Coherence of probability judgments from uncertain evidence: Does ACH help?," Judgment and Decision Making, Society for Judgment and Decision Making, vol. 15(6), pages 939-958, November.
    6. Eva Regnier, 2018. "Probability Forecasts Made at Multiple Lead Times," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 64(5), pages 2407-2426, May.
    7. repec:cup:judgdm:v:16:y:2021:i:4:p:1072-1096 is not listed on IDEAS
    8. Raphael Flepp & Stephan Nüesch & Egon Franck, 2013. "Liquidity, Market Efficiency and the Influence of Noise Traders: Quasi-Experimental Evidence from the Betting Industry," Working Papers 341, University of Zurich, Department of Business Administration (IBW).
    9. David A. Comerford, 2021. "Apparent age and gender differences in survival optimism: To what extent are they a bias in the translation of beliefs onto a percentage scale?," Judgment and Decision Making, Society for Judgment and Decision Making, vol. 16(4), pages 1072-1096, July.
    10. repec:cup:judgdm:v:15:y:2020:i:6:p:939-958 is not listed on IDEAS
    11. repec:cup:judgdm:v:15:y:2020:i:5:p:783-797 is not listed on IDEAS
    12. repec:cup:judgdm:v:13:y:2018:i:2:p:185-201 is not listed on IDEAS
    13. Edgar C. Merkle & Mark Steyvers, 2013. "Choosing a Strictly Proper Scoring Rule," Decision Analysis, INFORMS, vol. 10(4), pages 292-304, December.
    14. David R. Mandel & Robert N. Collins & Evan F. Risko & Jonathan A. Fugelsang, 2020. "Effect of confidence interval construction on judgment accuracy," Judgment and Decision Making, Society for Judgment and Decision Making, vol. 15(5), pages 783-797, September.
    15. Borgonovo, Emanuele & Hazen, Gordon B. & Jose, Victor Richmond R. & Plischke, Elmar, 2021. "Probabilistic sensitivity measures as information value," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 289(2), pages 595-610.
    16. David J. Johnstone & Victor Richmond R. Jose & Robert L. Winkler, 2011. "Tailored Scoring Rules for Probabilities," Decision Analysis, INFORMS, vol. 8(4), pages 256-268, December.
    17. Lambert, Nicolas S. & Langford, John & Wortman Vaughan, Jennifer & Chen, Yiling & Reeves, Daniel M. & Shoham, Yoav & Pennock, David M., 2015. "An axiomatic characterization of wagering mechanisms," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 156(C), pages 389-416.
    18. Edgar C. Merkle & Robert Hartman, 2018. "Weighted Brier score decompositions for topically heterogenous forecasting tournaments," Judgment and Decision Making, Society for Judgment and Decision Making, vol. 13(2), pages 185-201, March.
    19. Raja, Aitazaz Ali & Pinson, Pierre & Kazempour, Jalal & Grammatico, Sergio, 2024. "A market for trading forecasts: A wagering mechanism," International Journal of Forecasting, Elsevier, vol. 40(1), pages 142-159.
    20. Karvetski, Christopher W. & Meinel, Carolyn & Maxwell, Daniel T. & Lu, Yunzi & Mellers, Barbara A. & Tetlock, Philip E., 2022. "What do forecasting rationales reveal about thinking patterns of top geopolitical forecasters?," International Journal of Forecasting, Elsevier, vol. 38(2), pages 688-704.
    21. Azar, Pablo D. & Micali, Silvio, 2018. "Computational principal agent problems," Theoretical Economics, Econometric Society, vol. 13(2), May.
    22. Angelica Gianfreda & Francesco Ravazzolo & Luca Rossini, 2023. "Large Time‐Varying Volatility Models for Hourly Electricity Prices," Oxford Bulletin of Economics and Statistics, Department of Economics, University of Oxford, vol. 85(3), pages 545-573, June.
    23. David R. Mandel & Daniel Irwin, 2021. "Tracking accuracy of strategic intelligence forecasts: Findings from a long‐term Canadian study," Futures & Foresight Science, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 3(3-4), September.
    24. Tobias Fissler & Yannick Hoga, 2024. "How to Compare Copula Forecasts?," Papers 2410.04165, arXiv.org.

    More about this item

    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:wly:fufsci:v:2:y:2020:i:3-4:n:e39. 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: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://doi.org/10.1002/(ISSN)2573-5152 .

    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.