The Value of Performance Weights and Discussion in Aggregated Expert Judgments

Anca M. Hanea, Marissa F. McBride, Mark A. Burgman and Bonnie C. Wintle

Risk Analysis, 2018, vol. 38, issue 9, 1781-1794

Abstract: In risky situations characterized by imminent decisions, scarce resources, and insufficient data, policymakers rely on experts to estimate model parameters and their associated uncertainties. Different elicitation and aggregation methods can vary substantially in their efficacy and robustness. While it is generally agreed that biases in expert judgments can be mitigated using structured elicitations involving groups rather than individuals, there is still some disagreement about how to best elicit and aggregate judgments. This mostly concerns the merits of using performance‐based weighting schemes to combine judgments of different individuals (rather than assigning equal weights to individual experts), and the way that interaction between experts should be handled. This article aims to contribute to, and complement, the ongoing discussion on these topics.

Date: 2018
References: View references in EconPapers View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations: View citations in EconPapers (3)

Downloads: (external link)
https://doi.org/10.1111/risa.12992

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:wly:riskan:v:38:y:2018:i:9:p:1781-1794

Access Statistics for this article

More articles in Risk Analysis from John Wiley & Sons
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Wiley Content Delivery ().