Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40519976›Full record

ArticlePublic opinion quarterly2025

The Effects of Forecasts on the Accuracy and Precision of Expectations.

Matthew Barnfield, Joseph Phillips, Florian Stoeckel, Benjamin Lyons, Paula Szewach, Jack Thompson, Vittorio Mérola, Sabrina Stöckli, Jason Reifler

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Public opinion quarterly, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

9 authors.

Matthew BarnfieldPostdoctoral Fellow, School of Politics and International Relations, Queen Mary University of London, London, UK.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1237-9594
Joseph PhillipsLecturer, School of Law and Politics, Cardiff University, Cardiff, UK.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0084-4601
Florian StoeckelAssociate Professor, Department of Politics, University of Exeter, Exeter, UK.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8937-5962
Benjamin LyonsAssistant Professor, Department of Communication, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, UT, US.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7096-900X
Paula SzewachRecognized Researcher, Barcelona Supercomputing Centre, Barcelona, Spain.
Jack ThompsonPostdoctoral Research Fellow, Leeds University Business School, University of Leeds, Leeds, UK.
Vittorio MérolaAssistant Professor, School of Government and International Affairs, Durham University, Durham, UK.
Sabrina StöckliSenior Research Associate, Chair of Marketing, University of Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland.
Jason ReiflerProfessor, Department of Politics and International Relations, University of Southampton, Southampton, UK.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1116-7346

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Quantitative forecasts have become increasingly prominent as tools for aiding public understanding of sociopolitical trends. But how much, and what, do people learn from quantitative forecasts? In this note, we show through a preregistered survey experiment that real forecasts of the 2022 French presidential election significantly affect expectations of the election result. The direction of that effect hinges on how the forecast is presented. Voters become more accurate and precise in their predictions of each candidate's vote share when given forecast information in the form of projected vote share. Forecasts presented as numerical probabilities make such expectations

Identifiers

PMID40519976
PMCPMC12166975

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.