• Graduate Programs
  • Research
  • Browse our Courses
  • Events
    • Events Calendar
    • Events Archive
    • Summer School
      • Applied Public Policy Evaluation
      • Deep Learning
      • Development Economics
      • Economics of Blockchain and Digital Currencies
      • Economics of Climate Change
      • The Economics of Crime
      • Foundations of Machine Learning with Applications in Python
      • From Preference to Choice: The Economic Theory of Decision-Making
      • Inequalities in Health and Healthcare
      • Marketing Research with Purpose
      • Markets with Frictions
      • Modern Toolbox for Spatial and Functional Data
      • Sustainable Finance
      • Tuition Fees and Payment
      • Business Data Science Summer School Program
    • Tinbergen Institute Lectures
    • 2026 Tinbergen Institute Opening Conference
    • Annual Tinbergen Institute Conference
  • News
  • Summer School
    • Applied Public Policy Evaluation
    • Deep Learning
    • Development Economics
    • Economics of Blockchain and Digital Currencies
    • Economics of Climate Change
    • The Economics of Crime
    • Foundations of Machine Learning with Applications in Python
    • From Preference to Choice: The Economic Theory of Decision-Making
    • Inequalities in Health and Healthcare
    • Marketing Research with Purpose
    • Markets with Frictions
    • Modern Toolbox for Spatial and Functional Data
    • Sustainable Finance
    • Tuition Fees and Payment
  • Alumni

Juodis, A. and Kučinskas, S. (2023). Quantifying noise in survey expectations Quantitative Economics, 14(2):609--650.


  • Journal
    Quantitative Economics

Expectations affect economic decisions, and inaccurate expectations are costly. Expectations can be wrong due to either bias (systematic mistakes) or noise (unsystematic mistakes). We develop a framework for quantifying the level of noise in survey expectations. The method is based on the insight that theoretical models of expectation formation predict a factor structure for individual expectations. Using data from professional forecasters, we find that the magnitude of noise is large (10%–30% of forecast MSE) and comparable to bias. We illustrate how our estimates can be applied to calibrate models with incomplete information and bound the effects of measurement error.