Using prediction markets to forecast research evaluations

Royal Society Open Science

Volumn 2, Issue 10, 2015, Pages

  Munafo, Marcus R ^a   Pfeiffer, Thomas ^b,c   Altmejd, Adam ^d   Heikensten, Emma ^d   Almenberg, Johan ^e   Bird, Alexander ^a   Chen, Yiling ^f   Wilson, Brad ^g   Johannesson, Magnus ^d   Dreber, Anna ^d  

^a UNIVERSITY OF BRISTOL   (United Kingdom)

^b MASSEY UNIVERSITY   (New Zealand)

^c Wissenschaftskolleg zu Berlin   (Germany)

^d STOCKHOLM SCHOOL OF ECONOMICS   (Sweden)

^e SVERIGES RIKSBANK   (Sweden)

^f HARVARD UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^g Harvard University ^*  (United States)

Author keywords

Prediction market; Research evaluation; Research excellence framework

Indexed keywords

EID: 84958092804     PISSN: None     EISSN: 20545703     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1098/rsos.150287     Document Type: Article

References (14)

1. Sayer D. 2015 Rank hypocrisies: the insult of the REF. Beverley Hills, CA: Sage.
2. Wolfers J, Zitewitz E. 2004 Prediction markets. J. Econ. Perspect. 18, 107-126. (doi: 10. 1257/0895 330041371321).
3. Tziralis G, Tatsiopoulos I. 2007 Prediction markets: an extended literature review. J. Predict. Mark. 1, 75-91.
4. Arrow K et al. 2008 The promise of prediction markets. Science 320, 877-878. (doi: 10. 1126/ science. 1157679).
5. Almenberg J, Kittlitz K, Pfeiffer T. 2009 An experiment on prediction markets in science. PLoS ONE 4, e8500. (doi: 10. 1371/journal. pone. 0008500).
6. Hanson RD. 1995 Could gambling save science? Soc. Epistemol. 9, 3-33. (doi: 10. 1080/026917295085 78768).
7. Park I-U, Peacey MW, Munafo MR. 2013 Modelling the effects of subjective and objective decision making in scientific peer review. Nature 506, 93-96. (doi: 10. 1038/nature 12786).
8. Manski CF. 2006 Interpreting the predictions of prediction markets. Econ. Lett. 91, 425-429. (doi: 10. 1016/j. econlet. 2006. 01. 004).
9. Wolfers J, Zitewitz E. 2006 Interpreting prediction market prices as probabilities. NBERWorking Paper No. 12200.
10. Hanson RD. 2007 Logarithmic market scoring rules for modular combinatorial information aggregation. J. Predict. Mark. 1, 3-15.
11. Mryglod O, Kenna R, Holovatch Y, Berche B. 2015 Predicting results of the research excellence framework using departmental h-index-revisited. See: http: //arxiv. org/abs/1501. 07857.
12. Bishop D. 2013 Departmental h-index is a more transparent, fair and cost-effective method for distributing funding to universities. See http: //blogs. lse. ac. uk/impactofsocialsciences/ 2013/02/08/impact-factors-and-an-alternativeto-ref-2014.
13. Higher Education Funding Council for England. 2015 Themetric tide: report of the independent review of the role of metrics in research assessment and management. See http: //www. hefce. ac. uk/ pubs/rereports/Year/2015/metrictide/Title, 104463, en. html.
14. Else H. 2015 REF 2014 cost almost £250 million. Times Higher Education. See: http: //www. timeshighereducation. com/news/ref-2014-cost-250-million.