Probabilistic forecasts of stock prices and earnings: The hazards of nascent expertise

Abstract Undergraduate and graduate students in finance courses made probabilistic forecasts of the quarterly changes in the stock prices and earnings of publicly traded companies. Consistent with previous findings ( Stael von Holstein, 1972 ), the overall accuracy of both price and earnings forecasts was very modest; subjects would have been more accurate had they predicted that price changes were equally likely to fall into any of the specified ranges. Also consistent with earlier suggestions of “inverted” expertise effects, undergraduate subjects were more accurate than graduate subjects. Decompositional analyses of subjects' judgments were consistent with the hypothesis that graduate students' relatively poor accuracy was affected by their greater tendency to report forecasts that varied from one stock to the next instead of the same forecast for every one. It is argued that the most plausible explanation is that the graduate subjects responded to cues they thought were predictive, but which actually were not. However, it cannot be ruled out completely that the graduate subjects attended to truly predictive cues, but were simply unable to use them appropriately.

[1]  J. Armstrong,et al.  Relative Accuracy of Judgmental and Extrapolative Methods in Forecasting Annual Earnings , 1983 .

[2]  Paul J. Feltovich,et al.  Categorization and Representation of Physics Problems by Experts and Novices , 1981, Cogn. Sci..

[3]  A. H. Murphy,et al.  Scalar and Vector Partitions of the Probability Score: Part I. Two-State Situation , 1972 .

[4]  J. Frank Yates,et al.  Analyzing the accuracy of probability judgments for multiple events: An extension of the covariance decomposition , 1988 .

[5]  J. C. Naylor,et al.  Characteristics of the human inference process in complex choice behavior situations , 1966 .

[6]  Carl-Axel S. Staël von Holstein,et al.  Probabilistic forecasting: An experiment related to the stock market , 1972 .

[7]  A. H. Murphy,et al.  “Good” Probability Assessors , 1968 .

[8]  F. Sanders.  On Subjective Probability Forecasting , 1963 .

[9]  James Shanteau,et al.  Reducing the influence of irrelevant information on experienced decision makers , 1984 .

[10]  M K Kaiser,et al.  The development of sensitivity to causally relevant dynamic information. , 1984, Child development.

[11]  B. Adelson.  When Novices Surpass Experts: The Difficulty of a Task May Increase With Expertise , 1984 .

[12]  J. Lorie,et al.  The Stock Market: Theories and Evidence , 1973 .

[13]  E. Brunswik,et al.  The psychology of Egon Brunswik , 1966 .

[14]  R D Cebul,et al.  The accuracy of experienced physicians' probability estimates for patients with sore throats. Implications for decision making. , 1985, JAMA.

[15]  A. H. Murphy.  A New Vector Partition of the Probability Score , 1973 .

[16]  G. Murphy,et al.  Changes in conceptual structure with expertise: Differences between real-world experts and novices. , 1984 .

[17]  E. Fama.  The Behavior of Stock-Market Prices , 1965 .

[18]  Harry V. Roberts,et al.  STOCK‐MARKET “PATTERNS” AND FINANCIAL ANALYSIS: METHODOLOGICAL SUGGESTIONS , 1959 .

[19]  G. Brier.  VERIFICATION OF FORECASTS EXPRESSED IN TERMS OF PROBABILITY , 1950 .

[20]  G. Brier,et al.  External correspondence: Decompositions of the mean probability score , 1982 .

[21]  H. Simon,et al.  Perception in chess , 1973 .

[22]  David L. Ronis,et al.  Components of probability judgment accuracy: Individual consistency and effects of subject matter and assessment method. , 1987 .