Combining the Opinions of Experts Who Partition Events Differently

References

• Berger J.Statistical Decision Theory and Bayesian Analysis (1985) (Springer-Verlag, New York) Crossref, Google Scholar
• Billingsley P.Probability & Measure (1995) (John Wiley & Sons, New York) Google Scholar
• Clemen R. Combining overlapping information. Management Sci. (1987) 33(3):373–380Link, Google Scholar
• Clemen R., Winkler R. Combining probability distributions from experts in risk analysis. Risk Anal. (1999) 19(2):187–203Crossref, Google Scholar
• Dickey J., Jiang J., Kadane J. Bayesian methods for censored categorical data. J. Amer. Statist. Assoc. (1987) 82(399):773–781Crossref, Google Scholar
• Fischhoff B., Slovic P., Lichtenstein S. Fault-trees: Sensitivity of estimated failure probabilities to problem representation. J. Experiment. Psych.: Human Perception and Performance (1978) 4:330–344Crossref, Google Scholar
• Fox C., Clemen R. Subjective probability assessment in decision analysis: Partition dependence and bias toward the ignorance prior. Management Sci. (2005) 51(9):1417–1432Link, Google Scholar
• Fox C., Rottenstreich Y. Partition priming in judgement under Uncertainty. Psych. Sci. (2003) 14(3):195–200Crossref, Google Scholar
• Fox C., Tversky A., Kahneman D., Tversky A. A belief-based account of decision-making under uncertainty. Choices, Values & Frames (1995) (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK) 118–142Google Scholar
• French S. Group consensus probability distributions: A critical survey. Bayesian Statist. (1985) 2:183–202Google Scholar
• French S., Insua D., Ruggeri F. E-participation and decision analysis. Decision Anal. (2007) 4(4):211–226Link, Google Scholar
• Gelman A., Carlin J., Stern H., Rubin D.Bayesian Data Analysis (1995) (Chapman & Hall, New York) Crossref, Google Scholar
• Genest C., Zidek J. V. Combining probability distributions: A critique and an annotated bibliography. Statist. Sci. (1986) 1:114–148Crossref, Google Scholar
• Good I.Probability and the Weighting of Evidence (1950) (Hafner, New York) Google Scholar
• Hoffman S., Fischbeck P., Krupnick A., McWilliams M. Elicitation from large, heterogeneous expert panels: Using multiple uncertainty measures to characterize information quality for decision analysis. Decision Anal. (2007) 4(2):92–109Link, Google Scholar
• Johnson E., Hershey J., Meszaros J., Kenreuther H. Framing, probability distortions and insurance decisions. J. Risk Uncertainty (1993) 7:35–51Crossref, Google Scholar
• Keisler J., Keisler H. (2008) . The report problem. http://www.math.wisc.edu/∼keisler/ReportProb-010108-web.pdfGoogle Scholar
• Lindley D. V., Tversky A., Brown R. V. On the reconciliation of probability assessments. J. Roy. Statist. Soc., Ser. A (General) (1979) 142(2):146–180Crossref, Google Scholar
• Morgan G., Henrion M.Uncertainty: A Guide to Dealing with Uncertainty in Quantitative Risk and Policy Analysis (1990) (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK) Crossref, Google Scholar
• Mosleh A., Bier V. Uncertainty about probability: A reconciliation with the subjectivist viewpoint. IEEE Trans. Systems, Man Cybernetics: Part A (1996) 26(3):303–310Crossref, Google Scholar
• Predd J., Osherson D., Kulkarni S., Poor H. Aggregating probabilistic forecasts from incoherent and abstaining experts. Decision Anal. (2008) 5(4):177–189Link, Google Scholar
• Rottenstreich Y., Tversky A. Unpacking, repacking and anchoring: Advances in support theory. Psych. Rev. (1997) 2:406–415Crossref, Google Scholar
• Schafer J.Analysis of Incomplete Multivariate Data (1997) (Chapman and Hall, London) Crossref, Google Scholar
• Wallsten T., Budescu D. Encoding subjective probabilities: A psychological and psychometric review. (1980) . EPA Research Report, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, Durham, NCGoogle Scholar
• Wong T. Generalized dirichlet distribution in Bayesian analysis. Appl. Math. Comput. (1998) 97:165–181Crossref, Google Scholar