Comparing input interfaces to elicit belief distributions

1Citations
Citations of this article
8Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

Abstract

This paper introduces a new software interface to elicit belief distributions of any shape: Click-and-Drag. The interface was tested against the state of the art in the experimental literature—a text-based interface and multiple sliders—and in the online forecasting industry—a distribution-manipulation interface similar to the one used by the most popular crowd-forecasting website. By means of a pre-registered experiment on Amazon Mechanical Turk, quantitative data on the accuracy of reported beliefs in a series of induced-value scenarios varying by granularity, shape, and time constraints, as well as subjective data on user experience were collected. Clickand-Drag outperformed all other interfaces by accuracy and speed, and was self-reported as being more intuitive and less frustrating, confirming the pre-registered hypothesis. Aside of the pre-registered results, Click-and-Drag generated the least drop-out rate from the task, and scored best in a sentiment analysis of an open-ended general question. Further, the interface was used to collect homegrown predictions on temperature in New York City in 2022 and 2042. Click-and-Drag elicited distributions were smoother with less idiosyncratic spikes. Free and open source, ready to use oTree, Qualtrics and Limesurvey plugins for Click-and-Drag, and all other tested interfaces are available at https://beliefelicitation.github.io/.

References Powered by Scopus

G*Power 3: A flexible statistical power analysis program for the social, behavioral, and biomedical sciences

44709Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

Measuring expectations

826Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

oTree-An open-source platform for laboratory, online, and field experiments

787Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

Cited by Powered by Scopus

Plinko: Eliciting beliefs to build better models of statistical learning and mental model updating

0Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Crosetto, P., & de Haan, T. (2023). Comparing input interfaces to elicit belief distributions. Judgment and Decision Making, 18(1). https://doi.org/10.1017/JDM.2023.21

Readers over time

‘22‘2402468

Readers' Seniority

Tooltip

PhD / Post grad / Masters / Doc 3

75%

Researcher 1

25%

Readers' Discipline

Tooltip

Economics, Econometrics and Finance 3

50%

Decision Sciences 1

17%

Business, Management and Accounting 1

17%

Computer Science 1

17%

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free
0