Taking Advice from prediction markets, meetings, and the Delphi method
Click here for the full paper.
Abstract. People do not pay enough attention to external advice. This study tested whether people are more likely to use advice if they are involved in the advice generation process. Three variants of a judge- advisor-system were analyzed in laboratory experiments. Judges (N=160) made estimates of 10 factual questions after simultaneously interacting with a group of advisors, either in a face-to-face meeting (FTF), a Delphi study, or a prediction market (PM). Consistent with prior research, revising advice harmed accuracy. Judges fully relied on advice in close to 30% of all cases. The results suggested that decision- makers should be involved in the process of advice generation as this reduces the likelihood of advice discounting. However, not all group processes seem equally suitable. In the PM groups, judges relied on the advice in only 7% of all cases. Information about the quality of advice was crucial for advice taking.
