When expert predictions fail

Igor Grossmann, Michael E.W. Varnum, Cendri A. Hutcherson, David R. Mandel

Research output: Contribution to journalReview articlepeer-review

3 Scopus citations

Abstract

We examine the opportunities and challenges of expert judgment in the social sciences, scrutinizing the way social scientists make predictions. While social scientists show above-chance accuracy in predicting laboratory-based phenomena, they often struggle to predict real-world societal changes. We argue that most causal models used in social sciences are oversimplified, confuse levels of analysis to which a model applies, misalign the nature of the model with the nature of the phenomena, and fail to consider factors beyond the scientist's pet theory. Taking cues from physical sciences and meteorology, we advocate an approach that integrates broad foundational models with context-specific time series data. We call for a shift in the social sciences towards more precise, daring predictions and greater intellectual humility.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)113-123
Number of pages11
JournalTrends in Cognitive Sciences
Volume28
Issue number2
DOIs
StatePublished - Feb 2024
Externally publishedYes

Keywords

  • causal models
  • expert judgment
  • level of analysis
  • modeling complexity
  • predictive power in social sciences
  • societal change

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Neuropsychology and Physiological Psychology
  • Experimental and Cognitive Psychology
  • Cognitive Neuroscience

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'When expert predictions fail'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this