The result: The experts were, by and large, horrific forecasters. Their areas of specialty, years of experience, and (for some) access to classified information made no difference. They were bad at short-term forecasting and bad at long-term forecasting. They were bad at forecasting in every domain. When experts declared that future events were impossible or nearly impossible, 15 percent of them occurred nonetheless. When they declared events to be a sure thing, more than one-quarter of them failed to transpire. As the Danish proverb warns, “It is difficult to make predictions, especially about the future.”
Christos Ampatzis on 23 Oct 09PD's article presented to the idea storm: "They find the data can best be explained using a model that says an individual can join a team if she/he can bring some new, complementary skills to the group. This interpretation goes against the idea that an individual will tend to mainly join-and remain comfortable in-groups of "like-minded" people."
LeopoldS on 25 Oct 09nice article according to the abstract but can't download the paper (can we from within ESA? do you have it already downloaded - would be interested in reading the full paper - can we apply this to behaviour and size of the ACT?
