This Article Full Text (PDF) References Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Alert me to new issues of the journal Add to Saved Citations Download to citation manager Request Permissions Request Reprints Add to My Marked Citations Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via Google Scholar Citing Articles via Scopus Google Scholar Articles by Dana, J. Articles by Dawes, R. M. Search for Related Content Social Bookmarking                         What's this?

The Superiority of Simple Alternatives to Regression for Social Science Predictions

Carnegie Mellon University

Some simple, nonoptimized coefficients (e.g., correlation weights, equal weights) were pitted against regression in extensive prediction competitions. After drawing calibration samples from large supersets of real and synthetic data, the researchers observed which set of sample-derived coefficients made the best predictions when applied back to the superset. When adjusted R from the calibration sample was < .6, correlation weights were typically superior to regression coefficients, even if the sample contained 100 observations per predictor; unit weights were likewise superior to all methods if adjusted R was < .4. Correlation weights were generally the best method. It was concluded that regression is rarely useful for prediction in most social science contexts.

Key Words: forecasting • improper linear models • prediction

Journal of Educational and Behavioral Statistics, Vol. 29, No. 3, 317-331 (2004)
DOI: 10.3102/10769986029003317


CiteULike    Complore    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    Twitter    What's this?

This article has been cited by other articles:

				A. G. Cuzan and C. M. Bundrick Predicting Presidential Elections with Equally Weighted Regressors in Fair's Equation and the Fiscal Model Political Analysis, July 1, 2009; 17(3): 333 - 340. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]