Andrew, the great frustration of Expert Political Judgment was -- for me -- that the book was so thin on details about Tetlock's methods and procedures. Tetlock obviously did a great deal of work, but whenever you want to know precisely how he did something, he directs you to the "Technological Appendix" or the "Methodological Appendix." Those appendices are light on detail, and I found them hard to follow. As a result, I've never been able to repose much confidence in the book, even though I'd like to do so. (A related problem is that none of the raw materials are available for inspection. Perhaps it's understandable that the data aren't available -- but even the statistical code that Tetlock used to analyze the data isn't available. That's a shame, as the code would help to make clear how he analyzed the data.)
Andrew, the great frustration of Expert Political Judgment was -- for me -- that the book was so thin on details about Tetlock's methods and procedures. Tetlock obviously did a great deal of work, but whenever you want to know precisely how he did something, he directs you to the "Technological Appendix" or the "Methodological Appendix." Those appendices are light on detail, and I found them hard to follow. As a result, I've never been able to repose much confidence in the book, even though I'd like to do so. (A related problem is that none of the raw materials are available for inspection. Perhaps it's understandable that the data aren't available -- but even the statistical code that Tetlock used to analyze the data isn't available. That's a shame, as the code would help to make clear how he analyzed the data.)
Is Superforecasting better in this regard?