IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ces/ceswps/_11721.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

The Perks and Perils of Machine Learning in Business and Economic Research

Author

Listed:
  • Tom L. Dudda
  • Lars Hornuf

Abstract

We examine predictive machine learning studies from 50 top business and economic journals published between 2010 and 2023. We investigate their transparency regarding the predictive performance of machine learning models compared to less complex traditional statistical models that require fewer resources in terms of time and energy. We find that the adoption of machine learning varies by discipline, and is most frequently used in information systems, marketing, and operations research journals. Our analysis also reveals that 28% of studies do not benchmark the predictive performance of machine learning models against traditional statistical models. These studies receive fewer citations, arguably due to a less rigorous analysis. Studies including traditional statistical models as benchmarks typically report high outperformance for the best machine learning model. However, the performance improvement is substantially lower for the average reported machine learning model. We contend that, due to opaque reporting practices, it often remains unclear whether the predictive gains justify the increased costs of more complex models. We advocate for standardized, transparent model reporting that relates predictive gains to the efficiency of machine learning models compared to less-costly traditional statistical models.

Suggested Citation

  • Tom L. Dudda & Lars Hornuf, 2025. "The Perks and Perils of Machine Learning in Business and Economic Research," CESifo Working Paper Series 11721, CESifo.
  • Handle: RePEc:ces:ceswps:_11721
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.cesifo.org/DocDL/cesifo1_wp11721.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    More about this item

    Keywords

    machine learning; predictive modelling; transparent model reporting;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • C18 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Econometric and Statistical Methods and Methodology: General - - - Methodolical Issues: General
    • C40 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Econometric and Statistical Methods: Special Topics - - - General
    • C52 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Econometric Modeling - - - Model Evaluation, Validation, and Selection

    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:ces:ceswps:_11721. 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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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: Klaus Wohlrabe (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/cesifde.html .

    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.