Author:
Hohle Sigrid Møyner,Teigen Karl Halvor
Abstract
AbstractPeople often make predictions about the future based on trends they have observed in the past. Revised probabilistic forecasts can be perceived by the public as indicative of such a trend. In five studies, we describe experts who make probabilistic forecasts of various natural events (effects of climate changes, landslide and earthquake risks) at two points in time. Prognoses that have been upgraded or downgraded from T1 to T2 were in all studies expected to be updated further, in the same direction, later on (at T3). Thus, two prognoses were in these studies enough to define a trend, forming the basis for future projections. This “trend effect” implies that non-experts interpret recent forecast in light of what the expert said in the past, and think, for instance, that a “moderate” landslide risk will cause more worry if it has previously been low than if it has been high. By transcending the experts’ most recent forecasts the receivers are far from conservative, and appear to know more about the experts’ next prognoses than the experts themselves.
Publisher
Cambridge University Press (CUP)
Reference36 articles.
1. Visualizing Seismic Risk and Uncertainty
2. Is guilt ‘likely’ or ‘not certain’?
3. What is said and what is meant: Conversational implicatures in natural conversations, research settings, media and advertising.;Wänke;Social communication,,2007
4. Gawthrop, E . (2015, March 10). NOAA: El Ni ño is (technically) here . Earth Institute, Columbia University: International Research Institute for Climate and Society. Retrieved from http://iri.columbia.edu/news/noaa-el-nino-is-technically-here/.
5. What's next? Judging sequences of binary events.
Cited by
5 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献