A post‐mortem on the predictions: Criteria, complaints, and compliments

James Lee Ray

International Interactions, 1997, vol. 23, issue 3-4, 367-386

Abstract: Rational choice, or expected utility models have garnered considerable skepticism in many quarters in recent years. Much of that skepticism is deserved. However, the model on which the forecasts in this collection are based is different from many of its competitors in ways which address quite directly the shortcomings that have generated most of the skepticism. Attempts to apply this model can be evaluated according to several criteria, such as the information provided about the experts that generate the data, whether or not the actual data on which the forecasts are based are provided to readers, whether those numbers or data conform with fairly straightforward logic, or intuitive ideas about the political events being analyzed, whether the issue being analyzed is truly one dimensional, and how specific, as well as how controversial, or counterintuitive the forecasts are. The forecasts here are intriguing, intelligent, and conscientious attempts to demonstrate the virtues of a forecasting model that has produced a rather lengthy record of success in both public policy‐oriented arenas, as well as the private sector. It is to be hoped that in the not‐too‐distant future, these attempts will appear rather crude and preliminary. Even if this occurs, the pioneering nature of these efforts should not be overlooked.

Date: 1997
References: Add references at CitEc
Citations:

Downloads: (external link)
http://hdl.handle.net/10.1080/03050629708434916 (text/html)
Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:taf:ginixx:v:23:y:1997:i:3-4:p:367-386

Ordering information: This journal article can be ordered from
http://www.tandfonline.com/pricing/journal/GINI20

DOI: 10.1080/03050629708434916

Access Statistics for this article

International Interactions is currently edited by Michael Colaresi and Gerald Schneider

More articles in International Interactions from Taylor & Francis Journals
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Chris Longhurst ().