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...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Munafo, Marcus R., Pfeiffer, Thomas, Altmejd, Adam, Heikensten, Emma, Almenberg, Johan, Bird, Alexander, Chen, Yiling, Wilson, Brad, Johannesson, Magnus, Dreber, Anna
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