The article argues that inflation expectations cannot be understood from a single headline forecast. In August, New York Fed data showed households’ year-ahead forecasts moving closer together even as the uncertainty within individual forecasts widened. Disagreement and uncertainty therefore capture different things: one measures how far people are from each other, while the other measures how wide a range of outcomes each person considers plausible.

That distinction matters for decisions. People can agree on the central outlook while remaining hesitant because they still see substantial downside risk. For firms, the same logic applies to investment and planning, especially when commitments are costly to reverse. Research can therefore create value without materially changing the headline forecast if it narrows the plausible range enough to alter timing, scale, or reversibility. The piece concludes that forecasts should be discussed alongside the uncertainty around them.