Judgmental Bootstrapping: Inferring Experts' Rules for Forecasting
نویسنده
چکیده
Judgmental bootstrapping is a type of expert system. It translates an experts' rules into a quantitative model by regressing the experts' forecasts against the information that he used. Bootstrapping models apply an experts' rules consistently, and many studies have shown that decisions and predictions from bootstrapping models are similar to those from the experts. Three studies showed that bootstrapping improved the quality of production decisions in companies. To date, research on forecasting with judgmental bootstrapping has been restricted primarily to cross-sectional data, not time-series data. Studies from psychology, education, personnel, marketing, and finance, showed that bootstrapping forecasts were more accurate than forecasts made by experts using unaided judgment. They were more accurate for eight of eleven comparisons, less accurate in one, and there were two ties. The gains in accuracy were generally substantial. Bootstrapping can be useful when historical data on the variable to be forecast are lacking or of poor quality; otherwise, econometric models should be used. Bootstrapping is most appropriate for complex situations, where judgments are unreliable, and where experts' judgments have some validity. When many forecasts are needed, bootstrapping is cost-effective. If experts differ greatly in expertise, bootstrapping can allow one to draw upon the forecasts made by the best experts. Bootstrapping aids learning; it can help to identify biases in the way experts make predictions, and it can reveal how the best experts make predictions. Finally, judgmental bootstrapping offers the possibility of conducting ?experiments@ when the historical data for causal variables have not varied over time. Thus, it can serve as a supplement for econometric models. Disciplines Business | Marketing Comments Suggested Citation: Armstrong, J.S. Judgmental Bootstrapping: Inferring Experts' Rules for Forecasting. In Principles of Forecasting: A Handbook for Researchers and Practitioners (Ed. J. Scott Armstrong). Kluwer, 2001. Publisher URL: http://www.springer.com/business+%26+management/business+for+professionals/book/ 978-0-7923-7930-0 This book chapter is available at ScholarlyCommons: http://repository.upenn.edu/marketing_papers/150 Principles of Forecasting: A Handbook for Researchers and Practitioners, J. Scott Armstrong (ed.): Norwell, MA: Kluwer Academic Publishers, 2001. Judgmental Bootstrapping: Inferring Experts= Rules for Forecasting J. Scott Armstrong The Wharton School University of Pennsylvania ABSTRACT Judgmental bootstrapping is a type of expert system. It translates an expert=s rules into a quantitative model by regressing the expert=s forecasts against the information that he used. Bootstrapping models apply an expert=s rules consistently, and many studies have shown that decisions and predictions from bootstrapping models are similar to those from the experts. Three studies showed that bootstrapping improved the quality of production decisions in companies. To date, research on forecasting with judgmental bootstrapping has been restricted primarily to cross-sectional data, not time-series data. Studies from psychology, education, personnel, marketing, and finance, showed that bootstrapping forecasts were more accurate than forecasts made by experts using unaided judgment. They were more accurate for eight of eleven comparisons, less accurate in one, and there were two ties. The gains in accuracy were generally substantial. Bootstrapping can be useful when historical data on the variable to be forecast are lacking or of poor quality; otherwise, econometric models should be used. Bootstrapping is most appropriate for complex situations, where judgments are unreliable, and where experts= judgments have some validity. When many forecasts are needed, bootstrapping is cost-effective. If experts differ greatly in expertise, bootstrapping can allow one to draw upon the forecasts made by the best experts. Bootstrapping aids learning; it can help to identify biases in the way experts make predictions, and it can reveal how the best experts make predictions. Finally, judgmental bootstrapping offers the possibility of conducting ?experiments@ when the historical data for causal variables have not varied over time. Thus, it can serve as a supplement for econometric models.Judgmental bootstrapping is a type of expert system. It translates an expert=s rules into a quantitative model by regressing the expert=s forecasts against the information that he used. Bootstrapping models apply an expert=s rules consistently, and many studies have shown that decisions and predictions from bootstrapping models are similar to those from the experts. Three studies showed that bootstrapping improved the quality of production decisions in companies. To date, research on forecasting with judgmental bootstrapping has been restricted primarily to cross-sectional data, not time-series data. Studies from psychology, education, personnel, marketing, and finance, showed that bootstrapping forecasts were more accurate than forecasts made by experts using unaided judgment. They were more accurate for eight of eleven comparisons, less accurate in one, and there were two ties. The gains in accuracy were generally substantial. Bootstrapping can be useful when historical data on the variable to be forecast are lacking or of poor quality; otherwise, econometric models should be used. Bootstrapping is most appropriate for complex situations, where judgments are unreliable, and where experts= judgments have some validity. When many forecasts are needed, bootstrapping is cost-effective. If experts differ greatly in expertise, bootstrapping can allow one to draw upon the forecasts made by the best experts. Bootstrapping aids learning; it can help to identify biases in the way experts make predictions, and it can reveal how the best experts make predictions. Finally, judgmental bootstrapping offers the possibility of conducting ?experiments@ when the historical data for causal variables have not varied over time. Thus, it can serve as a supplement for econometric models.
منابع مشابه
Expert Systems for Forecasting
Expert systems use rules to represent experts’ reasoning in solving problems. The rules are based on knowledge about methods and the problem domain. To acquire knowledge for an expert system, one should rely on a variety of sources, such as textbooks, research papers, interviews, surveys, and protocol analysis. Protocol analysis is especially useful if the area to be modeled is complex or if ex...
متن کاملElectronic Companion to: A Bayesian Model for Sales Forecasting at Sun Microsystems
There is a wealth of literature documenting the biases and errors associated with judgmentbased forecasting—c.f. (McGlothlin 1956, Tversky and Kahneman 1974, Wright and Ayton 1986, Bolger and Harvey 1998), for example. Mentzer and Bienstock (1998) and Tyebjee (1987) point out that in addition to these problems, judgmental sales forecasts could be distorted by other factors, such as organization...
متن کاملFindings from Evidence-based Forecasting: Methods for Reducing Forecast Error
Empirical comparisons of reasonable approaches provide evidence on the best forecasting procedures to use under given conditions. Base on this evidence, I summarize the progress made over the past quarter century with respect to methods for reducing forecasting error. Seven well-established methods have been shown to improve accuracy: combining forecasts and Delphi help for all types of data; c...
متن کاملFindings from evidence-based forecasting: methods for reducing forecast error
Empirical comparisons of reasonable approaches provide evidence on the best forecasting procedures to use under given conditions. Based on this evidence, I summarize the progress made over the past quarter century with respect to methods for reducing forecasting error. Seven well-established methods have been shown to improve accuracy: combining forecasts and Delphi help for all types of data; ...
متن کاملDo 'big losses' in judgmental adjustments to statistical forecasts affect experts' behaviour?
The behaviour of poker players and sports gamblers has been shown to change after winning or losing a significant amount of money on a single hand. In this paper, we explore whether there are changes in experts’ behaviour when performing judgmental adjustments to statistical forecasts and, in particular, examine the impact of ‘big losses’. We define a big loss as a judgmental adjustment that si...
متن کامل