• DOI:10.1038/s41562-017-0247-6
• Corpus ID: 21708295

The wisdom of the inner crowd in three large natural experiments

@article{vanDolder2017TheWO,
  title={The wisdom of the inner crowd in three large natural experiments},
  author={Dennie van Dolder and Martijn J. van den Assem},
  journal={Nature Human Behaviour},
  year={2017},
  volume={2},
  pages={21-26}
}

• Dennie van Dolder, Martijn J. van den Assem
• Published 9 January 2018
• Economics
• Nature Human Behaviour

The quality of decisions depends on the accuracy of estimates of relevant quantities. According to the wisdom of crowds principle, accurate estimates can be obtained by combining the judgements of different individuals1,2. This principle has been successfully applied to improve, for example, economic forecasts3–5, medical judgements6–9 and meteorological predictions10–13. Unfortunately, there are many situations in which it is infeasible to collect judgements of others. Recent research proposes that a similar principle applies to repeated judgements from the same person14. This paper tests this promising approach on a large scale in a real-world context. Using proprietary data comprising 1.2 million observations from three incentivized guessing competitions, we find that within-person aggregation indeed improves accuracy and that the method works better when there is a time delay between subsequent judgements. However, the benefit pales against that of between-person aggregation: the average of a large number of judgements from the same person is barely better than the average of two judgements from different people.The authors use large, real-world guessing competition datasets to test whether accuracy can be improved by aggregating repeated estimates by the same individual. They find that estimates do improve, but substantially less than with between-person aggregation.