We explore the interaction between a decision-maker (DM) and three biased, imperfectly informed experts in a setup in which the DM chooses an action affecting all. Experts may differ in their information quality. How should the DM organize the consultation to induce truthful reporting? We show that (i) if sequential consultation induces truth-telling, simultaneous consultation also does; however, (ii) the converse is only valid when experts have equal information quality, and (iii) the order of play in sequential consultation could matter when experts differ along information quality and biases.
Keywords: Experts, intrinsic (posterior) biases, (posterior) alignment.
*favor confirmar asistencia, para coordinar la solicitud de almuerzos*
Más información se encuentra disponible en la página web MIPP: https://mipp.cl/es/events_category/seminario/.