Abstract
Decision makers and forecasters often receive advice from different sources including human experts and statistical methods. This research examines, in the context of stock price forecasting, how the apparent source of the advice affects the attention that is paid to it when the mode of delivery of the advice is identical for both sources. In Study 1, two groups of participants were given the same advised point and interval forecasts. One group was told that these were the advice of a human expert and the other that they were generated by a statistical forecasting method. The participants were then asked to adjust forecasts they had previously made in light of this advice. While in both cases the advice led to improved point forecast accuracy and better calibration of the prediction intervals, the advice which apparently emanated from a statistical method was discounted much more severely.
Original language | English |
---|---|
Pages (from-to) | 390-409 |
Number of pages | 20 |
Journal | Journal of Behavioral Decision Making |
Volume | 22 |
Issue number | 4 |
Early online date | 9 Feb 2009 |
DOIs | |
Publication status | Published - Oct 2009 |
Keywords
- forecasting
- role of experts
- forecast adjustment
- source framing