[go: up one dir, main page]
IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/sap/wpaper/wp190.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Strategic judgment: its game-theoretic foundations,its econometric elicitation

Author

Listed:
  • Emilio Zanetti Chini
Abstract
We provide a new frequentist methodology that detects forecasting bias due to strategic interaction. This is based on a new environment, named Scoring Structure, where a Forecast User interacts with a Forecast Producer and Reality. A formal test for the null hypothesis of linearity in Scoring Structure is introduced. Linearity implies that forecasts are strategically coherent with evaluations and vice-versa. The new test has good small-sample properties and behaves consistently with theoretical requirements. We illustrate the use of the Scoring Structure and the coherence test via two case studies on the assessment of the probability of recessions for the U.S. economy and the evaluation of Norges Bank's Fan Charts of Output Gap. These support the endemic nature of the strategic judgment in Macroeconomics. Finally, we discuss the economic interpretation of the results obtained by our approach.

Suggested Citation

  • Emilio Zanetti Chini, 2019. "Strategic judgment: its game-theoretic foundations,its econometric elicitation," Working Papers in Public Economics 190, Department of Economics and Law, Sapienza University of Roma.
    • Handle: RePEc:sap:wpaper:wp190
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.dipecodir.it/wpsap/data/wp190.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Vladimir Vovk & Glenn Shafer, 2005. "Good randomized sequential probability forecasting is always possible," Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series B, Royal Statistical Society, vol. 67(5), pages 747-763, November.
    2. Terasvirta, Timo & Tjostheim, Dag & Granger, Clive W. J., 2010. "Modelling Nonlinear Economic Time Series," OUP Catalogue, Oxford University Press, number 9780199587155.
    3. Tilmann Gneiting & Roopesh Ranjan, 2011. "Comparing Density Forecasts Using Threshold- and Quantile-Weighted Scoring Rules," Journal of Business & Economic Statistics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 29(3), pages 411-422, July.
    4. repec:hal:journl:peer-00834423 is not listed on IDEAS
    5. Victor Richmond R. Jose & Robert F. Nau & Robert L. Winkler, 2008. "Scoring Rules, Generalized Entropy, and Utility Maximization," Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 56(5), pages 1146-1157, October.
    6. T. S. Breusch & A. R. Pagan, 1980. "The Lagrange Multiplier Test and its Applications to Model Specification in Econometrics," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 47(1), pages 239-253.
    7. Diks, Cees & Panchenko, Valentyn & van Dijk, Dick, 2011. "Likelihood-based scoring rules for comparing density forecasts in tails," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 163(2), pages 215-230, August.
    8. Engel, J. & Haugh, D. & Pagan, A., 2005. "Some methods for assessing the need for non-linear models in business cycle analysis," International Journal of Forecasting, Elsevier, vol. 21(4), pages 651-662.
    9. Gneiting, Tilmann & Raftery, Adrian E., 2007. "Strictly Proper Scoring Rules, Prediction, and Estimation," Journal of the American Statistical Association, American Statistical Association, vol. 102, pages 359-378, March.
    10. Gneiting, Tilmann & Ranjan, Roopesh, 2011. "Comparing Density Forecasts Using Threshold- and Quantile-Weighted Scoring Rules," Journal of Business & Economic Statistics, American Statistical Association, vol. 29(3), pages 411-422.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Emilio Zanetti Chini, 2018. "Forecaster’s utility and forecasts coherence," DEM Working Papers Series 145, University of Pavia, Department of Economics and Management.
    2. Kapetanios, G. & Mitchell, J. & Price, S. & Fawcett, N., 2015. "Generalised density forecast combinations," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 188(1), pages 150-165.
    3. Ruben Loaiza‐Maya & Gael M. Martin & David T. Frazier, 2021. "Focused Bayesian prediction," Journal of Applied Econometrics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 36(5), pages 517-543, August.
    4. David T. Frazier & Ruben Loaiza-Maya & Gael M. Martin, 2021. "Variational Bayes in State Space Models: Inferential and Predictive Accuracy," Papers 2106.12262, arXiv.org, revised Feb 2022.
    5. Ramon de Punder & Timo Dimitriadis & Rutger-Jan Lange, 2024. "Kullback-Leibler-based characterizations of score-driven updates," Papers 2408.02391, arXiv.org, revised Sep 2024.
    6. Jonas R. Brehmer & Tilmann Gneiting, 2020. "Properization: constructing proper scoring rules via Bayes acts," Annals of the Institute of Statistical Mathematics, Springer;The Institute of Statistical Mathematics, vol. 72(3), pages 659-673, June.
    7. Allen, Sam & Koh, Jonathan & Segers, Johan & Ziegel, Johanna, 2024. "Tail calibration of probabilistic forecasts," LIDAM Discussion Papers ISBA 2024018, Université catholique de Louvain, Institute of Statistics, Biostatistics and Actuarial Sciences (ISBA).
    8. Clements, Michael P., 2018. "Are macroeconomic density forecasts informative?," International Journal of Forecasting, Elsevier, vol. 34(2), pages 181-198.
    9. Arora Siddharth & Little Max A. & McSharry Patrick E., 2013. "Nonlinear and nonparametric modeling approaches for probabilistic forecasting of the US gross national product," Studies in Nonlinear Dynamics & Econometrics, De Gruyter, vol. 17(4), pages 395-420, September.
    10. C. Alexander & M. Coulon & Y. Han & X. Meng, 2024. "Evaluating the discrimination ability of proper multi-variate scoring rules," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 334(1), pages 857-883, March.
    11. Luisa Bisaglia & Matteo Grigoletto, 2021. "A new time-varying model for forecasting long-memory series," Statistical Methods & Applications, Springer;Società Italiana di Statistica, vol. 30(1), pages 139-155, March.
    12. Taillardat, Maxime & Fougères, Anne-Laure & Naveau, Philippe & de Fondeville, Raphaël, 2023. "Evaluating probabilistic forecasts of extremes using continuous ranked probability score distributions," International Journal of Forecasting, Elsevier, vol. 39(3), pages 1448-1459.
    13. Xiaochun Meng & James W. Taylor & Souhaib Ben Taieb & Siran Li, 2020. "Scores for Multivariate Distributions and Level Sets," Papers 2002.09578, arXiv.org, revised Jun 2023.
    14. Diks, Cees & Fang, Hao, 2020. "Comparing density forecasts in a risk management context," International Journal of Forecasting, Elsevier, vol. 36(2), pages 531-551.
    15. Tobias Fissler & Hajo Holzmann, 2022. "Measurability of functionals and of ideal point forecasts," Papers 2203.08635, arXiv.org.
    16. Onno Kleen, 2024. "Scaling and measurement error sensitivity of scoring rules for distribution forecasts," Journal of Applied Econometrics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 39(5), pages 833-849, August.
    17. Luisa Bisaglia & Matteo Grigoletto, 2018. "A new time-varying model for forecasting long-memory series," Papers 1812.07295, arXiv.org.
    18. Chuliá, Helena & Garrón, Ignacio & Uribe, Jorge M., 2024. "Daily growth at risk: Financial or real drivers? The answer is not always the same," International Journal of Forecasting, Elsevier, vol. 40(2), pages 762-776.
    19. Angelica Gianfreda & Francesco Ravazzolo & Luca Rossini, 2020. "Large Time-Varying Volatility Models for Electricity Prices," Working Papers No 05/2020, Centre for Applied Macro- and Petroleum economics (CAMP), BI Norwegian Business School.
    20. Magnus Reif, 2020. "Macroeconomics, Nonlinearities, and the Business Cycle," ifo Beiträge zur Wirtschaftsforschung, ifo Institute - Leibniz Institute for Economic Research at the University of Munich, number 87.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Business Cycle; Predictive Density; Forecast Evaluation; Coherence Testing; Scoring Rules and Structures;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • C12 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Econometric and Statistical Methods and Methodology: General - - - Hypothesis Testing: General
    • C22 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Single Equation Models; Single Variables - - - Time-Series Models; Dynamic Quantile Regressions; Dynamic Treatment Effect Models; Diffusion Processes
    • C44 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Econometric and Statistical Methods: Special Topics - - - Operations Research; Statistical Decision Theory
    • C53 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Econometric Modeling - - - Forecasting and Prediction Models; Simulation Methods

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:sap:wpaper:wp190. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Luisa Giuriato (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://ecodir.web.uniroma1.it/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.