They are giving probabilities for discrete events, which already captures their level of uncertainty. Probabilities of probabilities (i.e., a probability distribution of a probability) are not very useful concepts.
It looks like they are simply providing the summary data to their multiple choice survey questions. Still, CI or SEM would not apply (there is no SEM for 80% of forecasters said 'yes'). These graphs are literally just telling you the percent of responders who picked a given answer to the corresponding question.
edit- the longer I browse their website for the exact methodology, the less impressed I am with this group. The "Introducing the Superforecasters" section is so cringe.
This would imply that the confidence interval around the coefficient in a logistic regression is not a very useful concept, which I don't think is true.
That it is a little different. There you are estimating a continuous parameter (which happens to be interpretable as a probability) and it makes sense to have a probability distribution over that.
But if you are talking about whether a single discrete events will happen or not, a single number (the probability) already fully captures the uncertainty about it.
subroutine|3 years ago
edit- the longer I browse their website for the exact methodology, the less impressed I am with this group. The "Introducing the Superforecasters" section is so cringe.
https://goodjudgment.com/about/
alexilliamson|3 years ago
fddr|3 years ago
But if you are talking about whether a single discrete events will happen or not, a single number (the probability) already fully captures the uncertainty about it.