Eliciting Informative Feedback: The Peer-Prediction Method

References

• Avery C., Resnick P., Zeckhauser R. The market for evaluations. Amer. Econom. Rev. (1999) 89(3):564–584Crossref, Google Scholar
• Breese J., Heckerman D., Kadie C. Empirical analysis of predictive algorithms for collaborative filtering. Proc. Fourteenth Conf. Uncertainty Artificial Intelligence (1998) (Morgan Kaufmann Publisher, Madison, WI) Google Scholar
• Clemen R. Incentive contracts and strictly proper scoring rules. Test (2002) 11(1):195–217Crossref, Google Scholar
• Congdon P.Bayesian Statistical Modelling (2001) (Wiley, Chichester, UK) Google Scholar
• Cooke R. M.Experts in Uncertainty: Opinion and Subjective Probability in Science. (1991) (Oxford University Press, New York) Google Scholar
• Crémer J., McLean R. Optimal selling strategies under uncertainty for a discriminating monopolist when demands are interdependent. Econometrica (1985) 53(2):345–361Crossref, Google Scholar
• Crémer J., McLean R. Full extraction of surplus in Bayesian and dominant strategy auctions. Econometrica (1988) 56(6):1247–1257Crossref, Google Scholar
• d’Aspremont C., Gérard-Varet L.-A. Incentives and incomplete information. J. Public Econom. (1979) 11(1):25–45Crossref, Google Scholar
• d’Aspremont C., Gérard-Varet L.-A. Bayesian incentive compatible beliefs. J. Math. Econom. (1982) 10(1):83–103Crossref, Google Scholar
• Dellarocas C. Analyzing the economic efficiency of eBay-like online reputation reporting mechanisms. Proc. 3rd ACM Conf. Electronic Commerce (2001) (ACM Press, New York) Crossref, Google Scholar
• Friedman D. Effective scoring rules for probabilistic forecasts. Management Sci. (1983) 29(4):447–454Link, Google Scholar
• Gollier Cristian. The Economics of Risk and Time (2001) (MIT Press, Cambridge, MA) Crossref, Google Scholar
• Hanson R. Logarithmic market scoring rules for modular combinatoral information aggregation. (2002) . Working paper, Department of Economics, George Mason University, Fairfax, VAGoogle Scholar
• Jensen F., Peterson C. Psychological effects of proper scoring rules. Organ. Behavior Human Performance (1973) 9(2):307–317Crossref, Google Scholar
• Johnson S., Pratt J., Zeckhauser R. Efficiency despite mutually payoff-relevant private information: The finite case. Econometrica (1990) 58(4):873–900Crossref, Google Scholar
• Johnson S., Miller N., Pratt J., Zeckhauser R. Efficient design with interdependent valuations and an informed center. (2003) . Working paper RWP03-020, Kennedy School of Government, Harvard University, Cambridge, MAGoogle Scholar
• Kandori M., Matsushima H. Private observation, communication and collusion. Econometrica (1998) 66(3):627–652Crossref, Google Scholar
• Lampe C., Resnick P. Slash(dot) and burn: Distributed moderation in a large online conversation space. CHI Lett. (2004) 6(1):543–550Google Scholar
• Lavalle I. On cash equivalents and information evaluation in decisions under uncertainty: Part I: Basic theory. J. Amer. Statist. Assoc. (1968) 63(321):252–276Crossref, Google Scholar
• Miller N., Resnick P., Zeckhauser R. A sufficient condition for correlated information in mechanism design. (2005) (Mimeo, Harvard University, Cambridge, MA) Google Scholar
• Nau R. Should scoring rules be effective? Management Sci. (1985) 34(5):527–535Link, Google Scholar
• Nelson R., Bessler D. Subjective probabilities and scoring rules: Experimental evidence. Amer. J. Agricultural Econom. (1989) 71(2):363–369Crossref, Google Scholar
• Ottaviani M., Sørensen P. N. The strategy of professional forecasting. (2004) . Finance Research Unit working paper 2004–2005, University of Copenhagen, Copenhagen, DenmarkGoogle Scholar
• Pratt J., Raiffa H., Schlaifer R.Introduction to Statistical Decision Theory. (1965) (McGraw-Hill, New York) Google Scholar
• Prelec D. A two-person scoring rule for subjective reports. (2001) . Working paper, Marketing Center, MIT Sloan School, Cambridge, MAGoogle Scholar
• Prendergast C. A theory of yes-men. Amer. Econom. Rev. (1993) 83(4):757–770Google Scholar
• Roth A., Kagel J., Roth A. Introduction to experimental economics. The Handbook of Experimental Economics (1995) (Princeton University Press, Princeton, NJ) 3–110Google Scholar
• Sarwar B. M., Karypis G., Konstan J. A., Riedl J. Analysis of recommender algorithms for e-commerce. Proc. 2nd ACM Conf. Electronic Commerce (2000) (ACM Press, New York) 158–167Crossref, Google Scholar
• Savage L.Foundations of Statistics (1954) (Dover Publications, New York) Google Scholar
• Savage L. Elicitation of personal probabilities and expectations. J. Amer. Statist. Assoc. (1971) 66(336):783–801Crossref, Google Scholar
• Selten R. Axiomatic characterization of the quadratic scoring rule. Experiment. Econom. (1998) 1(1):43–62Crossref, Google Scholar
• Smith C. Consistency in statistical inference and decision. J. Roy. Statist. Soc., Series B (Methodological) (1961) 23(1):1–37Crossref, Google Scholar
• Staël von Holstein C.-A. Measurement of subjective probability. Acta Psych. (1970) 34(1):146–159Crossref, Google Scholar
• Winkler R. Scoring rules and the evaluation of probability assessors. J. Amer. Statist. Assoc. (1969) 64(327):1073–1078Crossref, Google Scholar
• Winkler R. Scoring rules and the evaluation of probabilities. Test (1996) 5(1):1–60Crossref, Google Scholar