Abstract
Forecasters often need to estimate uncertain quantities, but with limited time and resources. Decomposition is a method for dealing with such problems by breaking down (decomposing) the estimation task into a set of components that can be more readily estimated, and then combining the component estimates to produce a target estimate. Estimators can effectively apply decomposition to either multiplicative or segmented forecasts, though multiplicative decomposition is especially sensitive to correlated errors in component values. Decomposition is most used for highly uncertain estimates, such as ones having a large numerical value (e.g., millions or more) or quantities in an unfamiliar metric. When possible, multiple estimators should be used and the results aggregated. In addition, multiple decompositions can be applied to the same estimation problem and the results resolved into a single estimate. Decomposition should be used only when the estimator can make component estimates more accurately or more confidently than the target estimate.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Preview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
References
Andradottir, S. & V. M. Bier (1997), “Choosing the number of conditioning events in judgmental forecasting,” Journal of Forecasting, 16, 255–286.
Arkes, H. R. (2001), “Overconfidence in judgmental forecasting,” in J. S. Armstrong (ed.), Principles of Forecasting. Norwell, MA: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
Armstrong, J. S. (1985), Long-Range Forecasting: From Crystal Ball to Computer (2nd ed.) New York: John Wiley & Sons. (Full text at http://www.hops.wharton.upenn.edu/forecast.)
Armstrong, J. S. & J. G. Andress (1970), “Exploratory analysis of marketing data: Trees vs. regression,” Journal of Marketing Research,7, 487–492. (Full text at http://www.hops.wharton.upenn.edu/forecast.)
Armstrong, J. S., W. B. Denniston & M. M. Gordon (1975), “The use of the decomposition principle in making judgments,” Organizational Behavior and Human Performance, 14, 257–263.
Bonner, S. E., R. Libby & M. W. Nelson (1996), “Using decision aids to improve auditors’ conditional probability judgments,” The Accounting Review, 71, 221–240.
Connolly, T. & D. Dean (1997), “Decomposed versus holistic estimates of effort required for software writing tasks,” Management Science, 43, 1029–1045.
Dangerfield, B. J. & J. S. Morris (1992), “Top-down or bottom-up: Aggregate versus dis-aggregate extrapolations,” International Journal of Forecasting, 8, 233–241.
Dawes, R. M. (1975), “The mind, the model, and the task,” in F. Restie, R. M. Shiffron, N. J. Castellan, H. R. Lindman & D. B. Pisoni (eds.), Cognitive Theory. (Vol. 1, ), Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, pp. 119–129.
Dawes, R. M. (1979), “The robust beauty of improper linear models in decision making,” American Psychologist, 34, 571–582.
Dawes, R. M. & B. Corrigan (1974), “Linear models in decision making,” Psychological Bulletin, 81, 95–106.
Dunn, D. M., W. H. William & W. A. Spivey (1971), “Analysis and prediction of telephone demand in local geographic areas,” Bell Journal of Economics and Management Science, 2, 561–576.
Edmundson, R. H. (1990), “Decomposition: A strategy for judgmental forecasting,” Journal of Forecasting, 9, 305–314.
Edwards, W. & D. von Winterfeldt (1986), Decision Analysis and Behavioral Research. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Goldberg, L. R. (1968), “Simple models or simple processes? Some research on clinical judgments,” American Psychologist, 23, 483–496.
Goldberg, L. R. (1970), “Man vs. model of man: A rationale, plus some evidence, for a method of improving on clinical inferences,” Psychological Bulletin, 73, 422–432
Gordon, T. P., J. S. Morris & B. J. Dangerfield (1997), “Top-down or bottom-up: Which is the best approach to forecasting?” Journal of Business Forecasting, 16, 13–16
Harvey, N. (2001), “Improving judgment in forecasting,” in J. S. Armstrong (ed.), Princi-ples of Forecasting. Norwell, MA: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
Henrion, M., G. W. Fischer & T. Mullin (1993), “Divide and conquer? Effects of decomposition on the accuracy and calibration of subjective probability distributions,” Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 55, 207–227.
Hora, S. C., N. G. Dodd & J. A. Hora (1993), “The use of decomposition in probability assessments of continuous variables,” Journal of Behavioral Decision Making, 6, 133–147.
Kahneman, D., P. Slovic & A. Tversky (1982), Judgment Under Uncertainty: Heuristics and Biases. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Kleinmuntz, D. N., M. G. Fennema & M. E. Peecher (1996), “Conditioned assessment of subjective probabilities: Identifying the benefits of decomposition Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes,66, 1–15.
MacGregor, D. G. & J. S. Armstrong (1994), “Judgmental decomposition: When does it work?” International Journal of Forecasting, 10,495–506. (Full text at http://www.hops.wharton.upenn.edu/forecast.)
MacGregor, D. G. & S. Lichtenstein (1991), “Problem structuring aids for quantitative estimation,” Journal of Behavioral Decision Making, 4, 101–116.
MacGregor, D. G., S. Lichtenstein & P. Slovic (1988), “Structuring knowledge retrieval: An analysis of decomposed quantitative judgments,” Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 42, 303–323.
Meehl, P. E. (1957), “When shall we use our heads instead of the formula?” Journal of Counseling Psychology, 4, 268–273.
Menon, G. (1997), “Are the parts better than the whole? The effects of decompositional questions on judgments of frequent behaviors,” Journal of Marketing Research, 34, 335–346.
Plous, S. (1993), The Psychology of Judgment and Decision Making. New York: McGraw-Hill.
Raiffa, H. (1968), Decision Analysis. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.
Slovic, P. & S. Lichtenstein (1971), “Comparison of Bayesian and regression approaches to the study of information processing in judgment,” Organizational Behavior and Human Performance, 6, 649–744.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2001 Springer Science+Business Media New York
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
MacGregor, D.G. (2001). Decomposition for Judgmental Forecasting and Estimation. In: Armstrong, J.S. (eds) Principles of Forecasting. International Series in Operations Research & Management Science, vol 30. Springer, Boston, MA. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-0-306-47630-3_6
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-0-306-47630-3_6
Publisher Name: Springer, Boston, MA
Print ISBN: 978-0-7923-7401-5
Online ISBN: 978-0-306-47630-3
eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive