Cited by 131Forecasting Techniques and ApplicationsStatistical Methods and ApplicationsAdvanced Statistical Methods and Models

The superiority of simple alternatives to regression for social science predictions

Dana, Jason, Dawes, Robyn M.·2004·Journal of Educational and Behavioral Statistics

Abstract

Some simple, nonoptimized coefficients (e.g., correlation weights, equal weights) were pitted against regression in extensive prediction competitions. After drawing calibration samples from large supersets of real and synthetic data, the researchers observed which set of sample-derived coefficients made the best predictions when applied back to the superset. When adjusted R from the calibration sample was < .6, correlation weights were typically superior to regression coefficients, even if the sample contained 100 observations per predictor; unit weights were likewise superior to all methods if adjusted R was < .4. Correlation weights were generally the best method. It was concluded that regression is rarely useful for prediction in most social science contexts.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.3102/10769986029003317

Cites

19 of 19 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Regression estimates produce ex ante forecasts that are often less accurate than forecasts from 'unit weights' models.

    “However, studies have shown that regression estimates produce ex ante forecasts that are often less accurate than forecasts from 'unit weights' models.”

    From Illusions in Regression Analysis (2011) · cites this paper as Dana and Dawes (2004)

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

1 of the 20 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Dana, J., & Dawes, R. M.
Affiliations
Carnegie Mellon University (US)
Venue
Journal of Educational and Behavioral Statistics
Published
2004-09
Volume
29
Issue
3
Pages
317-331
ISSN
  • 1076-9986 (ISSN-L)
  • 1935-1054
OpenAlex
W2165744193
Cited by
131
References
20
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 2 · 2024: 4 · 2022: 6 · 2021: 4 · 2020: 5 · 2019: 5 · 2018: 11 · 2017: 9 · 2016: 10 · 2015: 13 · 2014: 8 · 2013: 11 · 2012: 5
FWCI
4.22
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Journal of Educational and Behavioral Statistics (publishedVersion)
  • RePEc: Research Papers in Economics (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Management Science and Operations Research › Forecasting Techniques and Applications
  • Physical Sciences › Mathematics › Statistics and Probability › Statistical Methods and Applications
  • Physical Sciences › Mathematics › Statistics and Probability › Advanced Statistical Methods and Models
Keywords
prediction, regression coefficients, correlation weights, equal weighting, unit weight, calibration samples, coefficient selection, synthetic data

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review