A survey of human judgement and quantitative forecasting methods
- PMID: 33972849
- PMCID: PMC8074796
- DOI: 10.1098/rsos.201187
A survey of human judgement and quantitative forecasting methods
Abstract
This paper's top-level goal is to provide an overview of research conducted in the many academic domains concerned with forecasting. By providing a summary encompassing these domains, this survey connects them, establishing a common ground for future discussions. To this end, we survey literature on human judgement and quantitative forecasting as well as hybrid methods that involve both humans and algorithmic approaches. The survey starts with key search terms that identified more than 280 publications in the fields of computer science, operations research, risk analysis, decision science, psychology and forecasting. Results show an almost 10-fold increase in the application-focused forecasting literature between the 1990s and the current decade, with a clear rise of quantitative, data-driven forecasting models. Comparative studies of quantitative methods and human judgement show that (1) neither method is universally superior, and (2) the better method varies as a function of factors such as availability, quality, extent and format of data, suggesting that (3) the two approaches can complement each other to yield more accurate and resilient models. We also identify four research thrusts in the human/machine-forecasting literature: (i) the choice of the appropriate quantitative model, (ii) the nature of the interaction between quantitative models and human judgement, (iii) the training and incentivization of human forecasters, and (iv) the combination of multiple forecasts (both algorithmic and human) into one. This review surveys current research in all four areas and argues that future research in the field of human/machine forecasting needs to consider all of them when investigating predictive performance. We also address some of the ethical dilemmas that might arise due to the combination of quantitative models with human judgement.
Keywords: forecast combination; forecasting; human judgment; quantitative forecasting methods.
© 2021 The Authors.
Figures
Similar articles
-
Compromising improves forecasting.R Soc Open Sci. 2023 May 17;10(5):221216. doi: 10.1098/rsos.221216. eCollection 2023 May. R Soc Open Sci. 2023. PMID: 37206966 Free PMC article.
-
Human judgement forecasting of COVID-19 in the UK.Wellcome Open Res. 2024 Mar 21;8:416. doi: 10.12688/wellcomeopenres.19380.2. eCollection 2023. Wellcome Open Res. 2024. PMID: 38618198 Free PMC article.
-
Quantifying machine influence over human forecasters.Sci Rep. 2020 Sep 29;10(1):15940. doi: 10.1038/s41598-020-72690-4. Sci Rep. 2020. PMID: 32994447 Free PMC article.
-
Risk management frameworks for human health and environmental risks.J Toxicol Environ Health B Crit Rev. 2003 Nov-Dec;6(6):569-720. doi: 10.1080/10937400390208608. J Toxicol Environ Health B Crit Rev. 2003. PMID: 14698953 Review.
-
Affective forecasting and psychopathology: A scoping review.Clin Psychol Rev. 2024 Mar;108:102392. doi: 10.1016/j.cpr.2024.102392. Epub 2024 Jan 14. Clin Psychol Rev. 2024. PMID: 38244480
Cited by
-
Large language models predict cognition and education close to or better than genomics or expert assessment.Commun Psychol. 2025 Jul 3;3(1):95. doi: 10.1038/s44271-025-00274-x. Commun Psychol. 2025. PMID: 40610612 Free PMC article.
-
The simple observational critical care studies: estimations by students, nurses, and physicians of in-hospital and 6-month mortality.Crit Care. 2021 Nov 15;25(1):393. doi: 10.1186/s13054-021-03809-w. Crit Care. 2021. PMID: 34782000 Free PMC article.
-
Compromising improves forecasting.R Soc Open Sci. 2023 May 17;10(5):221216. doi: 10.1098/rsos.221216. eCollection 2023 May. R Soc Open Sci. 2023. PMID: 37206966 Free PMC article.
-
Advancing treatment response prediction in first-episode psychosis: integrating clinical and electroencephalography features.Psychiatry Clin Neurosci. 2025 Apr;79(4):187-196. doi: 10.1111/pcn.13791. Epub 2025 Feb 3. Psychiatry Clin Neurosci. 2025. PMID: 39895596 Free PMC article.
References
-
- Einhorn HJ. 1972. Alchemy in the behavioral sciences. Public Opin. Q. 36, 367-378. (10.1086/268019) - DOI
-
- Makridakis S, Spiliotis E, Assimakopoulos V. 2018. The M4 Competition: results, findings, conclusion and way forward. Int. J. Forecast. 34, 802-808. (10.1016/j.ijforecast.2018.06.001) - DOI
-
- Armstrong JS, Green KC. 2018. Forecasting methods and principles: evidence-based checklists. J. Global Scholars of Mark. Sci. 28, 103-159. (10.1080/21639159.2018.1441735) - DOI
-
- Armstrong JS, Green KC, Graefe A. 2015. Golden rule of forecasting: be conservative. J. Bus. Res. 68, 1717-1731. (10.1016/j.jbusres.2015.03.031) - DOI
Publication types
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
Other Literature Sources
