Cargando…
Using prediction markets to forecast research evaluations
The 2014 Research Excellence Framework (REF2014) was conducted to assess the quality of research carried out at higher education institutions in the UK over a 6 year period. However, the process was criticized for being expensive and bureaucratic, and it was argued that similar information could be...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
The Royal Society Publishing
2015
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4632515/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26587243 http://dx.doi.org/10.1098/rsos.150287 |
_version_ | 1782399046667730944 |
---|---|
author | Munafo, Marcus R. Pfeiffer, Thomas Altmejd, Adam Heikensten, Emma Almenberg, Johan Bird, Alexander Chen, Yiling Wilson, Brad Johannesson, Magnus Dreber, Anna |
author_facet | Munafo, Marcus R. Pfeiffer, Thomas Altmejd, Adam Heikensten, Emma Almenberg, Johan Bird, Alexander Chen, Yiling Wilson, Brad Johannesson, Magnus Dreber, Anna |
author_sort | Munafo, Marcus R. |
collection | PubMed |
description | The 2014 Research Excellence Framework (REF2014) was conducted to assess the quality of research carried out at higher education institutions in the UK over a 6 year period. However, the process was criticized for being expensive and bureaucratic, and it was argued that similar information could be obtained more simply from various existing metrics. We were interested in whether a prediction market on the outcome of REF2014 for 33 chemistry departments in the UK would provide information similar to that obtained during the REF2014 process. Prediction markets have become increasingly popular as a means of capturing what is colloquially known as the ‘wisdom of crowds’, and enable individuals to trade ‘bets’ on whether a specific outcome will occur or not. These have been shown to be successful at predicting various outcomes in a number of domains (e.g. sport, entertainment and politics), but have rarely been tested against outcomes based on expert judgements such as those that formed the basis of REF2014. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-4632515 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2015 |
publisher | The Royal Society Publishing |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-46325152015-11-19 Using prediction markets to forecast research evaluations Munafo, Marcus R. Pfeiffer, Thomas Altmejd, Adam Heikensten, Emma Almenberg, Johan Bird, Alexander Chen, Yiling Wilson, Brad Johannesson, Magnus Dreber, Anna R Soc Open Sci Psychology and Cognitive Neuroscience The 2014 Research Excellence Framework (REF2014) was conducted to assess the quality of research carried out at higher education institutions in the UK over a 6 year period. However, the process was criticized for being expensive and bureaucratic, and it was argued that similar information could be obtained more simply from various existing metrics. We were interested in whether a prediction market on the outcome of REF2014 for 33 chemistry departments in the UK would provide information similar to that obtained during the REF2014 process. Prediction markets have become increasingly popular as a means of capturing what is colloquially known as the ‘wisdom of crowds’, and enable individuals to trade ‘bets’ on whether a specific outcome will occur or not. These have been shown to be successful at predicting various outcomes in a number of domains (e.g. sport, entertainment and politics), but have rarely been tested against outcomes based on expert judgements such as those that formed the basis of REF2014. The Royal Society Publishing 2015-10-28 /pmc/articles/PMC4632515/ /pubmed/26587243 http://dx.doi.org/10.1098/rsos.150287 Text en http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ © 2015 The Authors. Published by the Royal Society under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/, which permits unrestricted use, provided the original author and source are credited. |
spellingShingle | Psychology and Cognitive Neuroscience Munafo, Marcus R. Pfeiffer, Thomas Altmejd, Adam Heikensten, Emma Almenberg, Johan Bird, Alexander Chen, Yiling Wilson, Brad Johannesson, Magnus Dreber, Anna Using prediction markets to forecast research evaluations |
title | Using prediction markets to forecast research evaluations |
title_full | Using prediction markets to forecast research evaluations |
title_fullStr | Using prediction markets to forecast research evaluations |
title_full_unstemmed | Using prediction markets to forecast research evaluations |
title_short | Using prediction markets to forecast research evaluations |
title_sort | using prediction markets to forecast research evaluations |
topic | Psychology and Cognitive Neuroscience |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4632515/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26587243 http://dx.doi.org/10.1098/rsos.150287 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT munafomarcusr usingpredictionmarketstoforecastresearchevaluations AT pfeifferthomas usingpredictionmarketstoforecastresearchevaluations AT altmejdadam usingpredictionmarketstoforecastresearchevaluations AT heikenstenemma usingpredictionmarketstoforecastresearchevaluations AT almenbergjohan usingpredictionmarketstoforecastresearchevaluations AT birdalexander usingpredictionmarketstoforecastresearchevaluations AT chenyiling usingpredictionmarketstoforecastresearchevaluations AT wilsonbrad usingpredictionmarketstoforecastresearchevaluations AT johannessonmagnus usingpredictionmarketstoforecastresearchevaluations AT dreberanna usingpredictionmarketstoforecastresearchevaluations |