Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
First edition (publ. Princeton University Press) Expert Political Judgment: How Good Is It? How Can We Know? is a 2005 book by Philip E. Tetlock.The book mentions how experts are often no better at making predictions than most other people, and how when they are wrong, they are rarely held accountable.
Philip E. Tetlock (born 1954) is a Canadian-American political science writer, ... (2005). The more pessimistic tone of Expert Political Judgment (2005) ...
The Good Judgment Project (GJP) is an organization dedicated to "harnessing the wisdom of the crowd to forecast world events".It was co-created by Philip E. Tetlock (author of Superforecasting and Expert Political Judgment), decision scientist Barbara Mellers, and Don Moore, all professors at the University of Pennsylvania.
Philip E. Tetlock, a political psychology professor at the University of Pennsylvania, drew heavily on this distinction in his exploration of the accuracy of experts and forecasters in various fields (especially politics) in his 2005 book Expert Political Judgment: How Good Is It? How Can We Know?
Three senior U.S. Justice Department officials committed misconduct in the final months of Donald Trump’s first presidency by leaking details about a non-public investigation, a move that may ...
Mellers is a co-founder of the Good Judgment Project, with colleagues Philip Tetlock and Don Moore. [6] The project began in a competition funded by the United States' government's Intelligence Advanced Research Projects Activity. Mellers, Tetlock and Moore won with their crowdsourced approach to geopolitical and economic forecasting, which ...
A look at polling at this point in past presidential elections gives Kamala Harris supporters reason to worry
The Economist reports that superforecasters are clever (with a good mental attitude), but not necessarily geniuses. It reports on the treasure trove of data coming from The Good Judgment Project, showing that accurately selected amateur forecasters (and the confidence they had in their forecasts) were often more accurately tuned than experts. [1]