Expert political judgment: how good is it? how can we know?
Abstract
The University Archives has determined that this item is of continuing value to OSU's history.
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
No citation lists for this paper
No citation lists for this paper yet — checked again daily.
Cited by 1,260
- Authors
- Tetlock, P. E.
- Corresponding author
- Philip E. Tetlock
- ORCID
- Philip E. Tetlock
- Venue
- Choice Reviews Online
- Publisher
- American Library Association
- Published
- 2006-02-01
- Volume
- 43
- Issue
- 06
- Pages
- 43-3634-43-3634
- ISSN
- 0009-4978 (ISSN-L)
- 1523-8253
- OpenAlex
- W1562951788
- Cited by
- 1,260
- References
- 0
- Citations by year
- 2025: 51 · 2024: 34 · 2023: 43 · 2022: 68 · 2021: 85 · 2020: 85 · 2019: 142 · 2018: 66 · 2017: 81 · 2016: 72 · 2015: 79 · 2014: 72 · 2013: 68 · 2012: 67
- Type
- book review
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Choice Reviews Online (publishedVersion)
- Project Muse (Johns Hopkins University) (submittedVersion)
- The Knowledge Bank (The Ohio State University) (submittedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Management Science and Operations Research › Forecasting Techniques and Applications
- Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › General Decision Sciences › Decision-Making and Behavioral Economics
- Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › Philosophy › Epistemology, Ethics, and Metaphysics
- Keywords
- political forecasting, expert opinion
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
