Eliciting Informative Feedback: The Peer-Prediction Method

600 citations recorded by the source corpus.

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

A penny for your thoughts: a survey of methods for eliciting beliefs (2014, unknown): “Miller et al. (2005) propose a mechanism where each subject is asked to predict the report of another subject after having received a signal about the state of the world.”
Eliciting beliefs: Proper scoring rules, incentives, stakes and hedging (2010, methodology): “To derive hypothesis H1, we chose to follow most of the experimental economics literature (including recent papers on scoring rules such as O¤erman et al. (2009) or Andersen et al.”
The Passions and the Interests: Unpacking the 'Sharing Economy' (2016, background): “Leaving an accurate rating is a public good and is likely to be under-provided (Avery et al., 1999; Miller et al., 2005).”
Scoping the Sharing Economy: Origins, Definitions, Impact and Regulatory Issues (2016, background): “An accurate rating is a public good and is likely to be under-provided (Avery et al., 1999; Miller et al., 2005).”
Cooperation Emergence under Resource-Constrained Peer Punishment (2016, background): “[18] suggest the use of explicit payment schemes as incentives to encourage honest reporting of information (such as reputation [18] and product feedback [27]) among an agent community.”