Expert Political Judgment: How Good Is It? How Can We Know?
4/5
()
Currently unavailable
Currently unavailable
About this ebook
The intelligence failures surrounding the invasion of Iraq dramatically illustrate the necessity of developing standards for evaluating expert opinion. This book fills that need. Here, Philip E. Tetlock explores what constitutes good judgment in predicting future events, and looks at why experts are often wrong in their forecasts.
Tetlock first discusses arguments about whether the world is too complex for people to find the tools to understand political phenomena, let alone predict the future. He evaluates predictions from experts in different fields, comparing them to predictions by well-informed laity or those based on simple extrapolation from current trends. He goes on to analyze which styles of thinking are more successful in forecasting. Classifying thinking styles using Isaiah Berlin's prototypes of the fox and the hedgehog, Tetlock contends that the fox--the thinker who knows many little things, draws from an eclectic array of traditions, and is better able to improvise in response to changing events--is more successful in predicting the future than the hedgehog, who knows one big thing, toils devotedly within one tradition, and imposes formulaic solutions on ill-defined problems. He notes a perversely inverse relationship between the best scientific indicators of good judgement and the qualities that the media most prizes in pundits--the single-minded determination required to prevail in ideological combat.
Clearly written and impeccably researched, the book fills a huge void in the literature on evaluating expert opinion. It will appeal across many academic disciplines as well as to corporations seeking to develop standards for judging expert decision-making.
Related to Expert Political Judgment
Related ebooks
Expert Political Judgment: How Good Is It? How Can We Know? - New Edition Rating: 4 out of 5 stars4/5American Insecurity: Why Our Economic Fears Lead to Political Inaction Rating: 0 out of 5 stars0 ratingsIn Our Name: The Ethics of Democracy Rating: 3 out of 5 stars3/5Phantom Menace or Looming Danger?: A New Framework for Assessing Bioweapons Threats Rating: 0 out of 5 stars0 ratingsPersonality Judgment: A Realistic Approach to Person Perception Rating: 0 out of 5 stars0 ratingsImportant Things We Don't Know: About Nearly Everything Rating: 0 out of 5 stars0 ratingsMaking Human Rights a Reality Rating: 0 out of 5 stars0 ratingsThe Quality of Government: Corruption, Social Trust, and Inequality in International Perspective Rating: 0 out of 5 stars0 ratingsExplanation and Progress in Security Studies: Bridging Theoretical Divides in International Relations Rating: 0 out of 5 stars0 ratingsThe Quick Fix: Why Fad Psychology Can't Cure Our Social Ills Rating: 4 out of 5 stars4/5Communism's Shadow: Historical Legacies and Contemporary Political Attitudes Rating: 1 out of 5 stars1/5Redeeming Expertise: Scientific Trust and the Future of the Church Rating: 0 out of 5 stars0 ratingsHow Statesmen Think: The Psychology of International Politics Rating: 4 out of 5 stars4/5The Science of Deception: Psychology and Commerce in America Rating: 0 out of 5 stars0 ratingsThe Substance of Representation: Congress, American Political Development, and Lawmaking Rating: 0 out of 5 stars0 ratingsScience v. Story: Narrative Strategies for Science Communicators Rating: 0 out of 5 stars0 ratingsStealing Into Print: Fraud, Plagiarism, and Misconduct in Scientific Publishing Rating: 0 out of 5 stars0 ratingsArendt's Judgment: Freedom, Responsibility, Citizenship Rating: 1 out of 5 stars1/5How Do You Know?: The Economics of Ordinary Knowledge Rating: 1 out of 5 stars1/5Mind-Reading and Beyond Rating: 0 out of 5 stars0 ratingsThe Boat Captain’S Conundrum: A Whimsical Tour Through a Policy Wonk’S Mind Rating: 0 out of 5 stars0 ratingsGetting New Things Done: Networks, Brokerage, and the Assembly of Innovative Action Rating: 0 out of 5 stars0 ratingsCommunity at Risk: Biodefense and the Collective Search for Security Rating: 0 out of 5 stars0 ratings"Lost" Causes: Agenda Vetting in Global Issue Networks and the Shaping of Human Security Rating: 0 out of 5 stars0 ratingsElecting Judges: The Surprising Effects of Campaigning on Judicial Legitimacy Rating: 0 out of 5 stars0 ratingsEight Preposterous Propositions: From the Genetics of Homosexuality to the Benefits of Global Warming Rating: 4 out of 5 stars4/5Politics in Time: History, Institutions, and Social Analysis Rating: 4 out of 5 stars4/5Misdemeanorland: Criminal Courts and Social Control in an Age of Broken Windows Policing Rating: 0 out of 5 stars0 ratingsReasons for Welfare: The Political Theory of the Welfare State Rating: 0 out of 5 stars0 ratingsThe Development Dilemma: Security, Prosperity, and a Return to History Rating: 0 out of 5 stars0 ratings
Philosophy For You
The Four Loves Rating: 4 out of 5 stars4/5A Course in Miracles: Text, Workbook for Students, Manual for Teachers Rating: 5 out of 5 stars5/5The Boy, the Mole, the Fox and the Horse Rating: 4 out of 5 stars4/5Experiencing God (2021 Edition): Knowing and Doing the Will of God Rating: 4 out of 5 stars4/5The Republic by Plato Rating: 4 out of 5 stars4/5Beyond Good and Evil Rating: 4 out of 5 stars4/5Sun Tzu's The Art of War: Bilingual Edition Complete Chinese and English Text Rating: 4 out of 5 stars4/5The Dictionary of Obscure Sorrows Rating: 4 out of 5 stars4/5The Meditations of Marcus Aurelius Rating: 4 out of 5 stars4/5Meditations: Complete and Unabridged Rating: 4 out of 5 stars4/5The City of God Rating: 4 out of 5 stars4/5The Art of War Rating: 4 out of 5 stars4/5Plato and a Platypus Walk Into a Bar...: Understanding Philosophy Through Jokes Rating: 4 out of 5 stars4/5The Denial of Death Rating: 4 out of 5 stars4/5The Art of Loving Rating: 4 out of 5 stars4/5The Courage to Be Happy: Discover the Power of Positive Psychology and Choose Happiness Every Day Rating: 4 out of 5 stars4/5Daily Stoic: A Daily Journal On Meditation, Stoicism, Wisdom and Philosophy to Improve Your Life Rating: 5 out of 5 stars5/5The Egyptian Book of the Dead: The Complete Papyrus of Ani Rating: 5 out of 5 stars5/5The Human Condition Rating: 4 out of 5 stars4/5Inward Rating: 4 out of 5 stars4/5Tao Te Ching: A New English Version Rating: 5 out of 5 stars5/5Lying Rating: 4 out of 5 stars4/5Tao Te Ching: Six Translations Rating: 4 out of 5 stars4/5The Allegory of the Cave Rating: 4 out of 5 stars4/5Fear: Essential Wisdom for Getting Through the Storm Rating: 4 out of 5 stars4/5Brain Training with the Buddha: A Modern Path to Insight Based on the Ancient Foundations of Mindfulness Rating: 3 out of 5 stars3/5No Man Is an Island Rating: 4 out of 5 stars4/5
Reviews for Expert Political Judgment
20 ratings2 reviews
- Rating: 5 out of 5 stars5/5This is a critical book for anyone one who depends on professional forecasters of "social" variables, and even more for anyone whose livelihood rests on making such forecasts. "Social" because Tetlock's book is focussed on political forecasting, but I'm convinced that it applies to economic and social forecasting as well. (Having spent a professional career forecasting economic variables, I have some insight here). Tetlock is not discussing forecasting in the hard sciences, where forecasting is based on much harder data.His first critical conclusion is that, in forecasting complex political events, "we could do as well by tossing coins as by consulting experts". This is based on a massive set of surveys of expert opinion that were compared to outcomes in the real world over many years. The task was enormously complex to set up; defining an experiment in the social sciences presents the problems that constantly arise in making judgements in these sciences (what does one measure, and how? How can bias be measured and eliminated? etc. etc.) Much of the book is devoted to the problems in constructing the study, and how they were resolved. His second key conclusion is that, while that may be true of experts as an undifferentiated group, some experts do significantly better than other experts. This does not reflect the level of expertise involved, nor does it reflect political orientation. Rather, it reflects the way the experts think. Poorer performers tend to be what Tetlock characterizes as "hedgehogs" -- people who apply theoretical frameworks, who stick with a line of argument, and who believe strongly in their own forecasts. The better performers tend to be what he calls "foxes" -- those with an eclectic approach, who examine many hypotheses, and who are more inclined to think probabilistically, by grading the likelihood of their forecasts.But, as he notes, the forecasters who get the most media exposure tend to be the hedgehogs, those with a strong point of view that can be clearly expressed. This makes all the sense in the world; someone with a clear cut and compelling story is much more fun to listen to (and much more memorable than) someone who presents a range of possible outcomes (as a former many-handed economist, I know this all too well).What does that mean for those of us who use forecasts? We use them in making political decisions, personal financial decisions, and investment decisions. This book tells us that WHAT THE EXPERTS SAY IS NOT LIKELY TO ADD MUCH TO THE QUALITY OF YOUR OWN DECISION MAKING. And that says be careful how much you pay for expert advice, and how much you rely on it. That of course applies to experts in the social sciences, NOT to experts in the hard (aka real) sciences. Generally, it is a good idea to regard your doctor as a real expert.Because it makes it impossible to avoid these conclusions, I gave this book five stars; this is very important stuff. I would not have given it five stars for the way in which it is written. For me, it read as if it had been written for other academics, rather than for the general reader. This is hard to avoid, but some other works in the field do manage -- for example, "Thinking Fast and Slow". Don't skip the book because it is not exactly an enjoyable read, however: its merit far outweighs its manner.
- Rating: 2 out of 5 stars2/5How good are political academics/think-tankers/pundits at predicting the outcome of political events? Tetlock studies their predictions over many years in an attempt to answer this question. It's an interesting question, and the research is solid, but I ended up drowning in the details of his analysis and addressing of the various threats to validity. The book feels too much like a PhD dissertation to be a compelling read.