This page provides summaries of the original research that led to the principles. Currently we have some of the papers. More will be added shortly. In addition, we post some papers that have contributed to principles. Please help us by sending papers – by yourselves or others – along with a thumbnail sketch that we would include to inform visitors as to which principles are affected and how.

 

Original research summaries

Bootstrapping
Selecting
Combining
Evaluating
Expert
Extrapolation
Rule-based
Standards
Role Playing

 


New findings


Papers with New Evidence on Principles

This section lists papers that contain new evidence relevant to forecasting principles. The most recent papers are listed first.
[To list your paper here, see instructions.]

  • Wright, M. and MacRae, M. (2007). "Bias and variability in purchase intention scales", Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 35, 617-624. - Full Text
  • J. Scott Armstrong, Kesten C. Green, Randall J. Jones, and Malcolm Wright (2008). "Predicting Elections From Politicians’ Faces" - Full Text

  • Green. K. C. and Armstrong J. S. (2007). "The Ombudsman: Value of Expertise for Forecasting Decisions in Conflicts", Interfaces, 37, 287-299. [Appears with introduction by Paul Goodwin (pp. 285-286) and commentary by Shelly A. Kirkpatrick, Jonathon J. Koehler, and Philip E. Tetlock.] Description

  • In a paper titled, "The Impact of Institutional Change on Forecast Accuracy: A Case Study of Budget Forecasting in Washington State" (Full Text) (expanded summary), Elaine Deschamps (2004) explored the relationship between organizational change and forecast accuracy by analyzing the budget forecasting process in the state of Washington. Principles were tested on 180 budget forecasts produced before and after the creation of the independent agency. Deschamps found that forecast error decreased by 22% (from a MAPE of 6.8% to 5.3%) after an independent forecasting agency was established.

  • Goodwin, P. (2002) "Integrating management judgment with statistical methods to improve short-term forecasts," Omega, 30, 127-135. Description

Working Papers with Evidence on Principles

Working papers are posted at this site to, first, establish a claim, and second, obtain peer review. Please contact the authors directly with suggestions, such as informing them of a relevant paper that was overlooked. Contact J. Scott Armstrong if you would like your working paper to be considered.

  • J. Scott Armstrong and Kesten C. Green (2005), "Demand Forecasting: Evidence-based Methods," Working Paper Full Text
  • Alfred G. Cuzàn, J. Scott Armstrong, and Randall J. Jones, "Combining Methods to Forecast the 2004 Presidential Election: The Pollyvote" - Full Text