Self-Confidence and Search

A. Falk, David Huffman, U. Sunde
{"title":"Self-Confidence and Search","authors":"A. Falk, David Huffman, U. Sunde","doi":"10.2139/ssrn.956394","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Standard search theory assumes that individuals know, with certainty, how they compare to competing searchers in terms of ability. In contrast, we hypothesize that searchers are uncertain about relative ability, with important implications for search behavior. We test our hypotheses in a laboratory experiment. The first main finding is that people are substantially uncertain about whether they are a type with a high or low probability of success, determined by being above or below the median in terms of ability. Self-confidence, defined as an individual’s self-assessed probability of being a high type, is too high (above zero) for many low types, and too low (below 1) for many high types. Second, people update beliefs based on search outcomes. Self-confidence increases or decreases in the right direction, but is less sensitive to new information than predicted by Bayes’ rule. Third, updating affects future search decisions: people are less likely to search as confidence about being a high type falls. Fourth, some search too little, and others search too much, due to wrong beliefs. Fifth, at the end of the experiment a substantial fraction turn down the chance to learn their exact rank. These are overwhelmingly those with low ability, suggesting an aversion to learning that one is one of the worst performers. Given that people are uncertain even in the simple setting of our experiment, our evidence strongly suggests that uncertainty about ability is relevant in more complex, real-world search settings, including search for a job or search for a mate. Focusing on the case of job search, we discuss how our findings can provide a new explanation for various important stylized facts from field evidence.","PeriodicalId":341058,"journal":{"name":"ERN: Primary Taxonomy (Topic)","volume":"16 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2006-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"48","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"ERN: Primary Taxonomy (Topic)","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.956394","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 48

Abstract

Standard search theory assumes that individuals know, with certainty, how they compare to competing searchers in terms of ability. In contrast, we hypothesize that searchers are uncertain about relative ability, with important implications for search behavior. We test our hypotheses in a laboratory experiment. The first main finding is that people are substantially uncertain about whether they are a type with a high or low probability of success, determined by being above or below the median in terms of ability. Self-confidence, defined as an individual’s self-assessed probability of being a high type, is too high (above zero) for many low types, and too low (below 1) for many high types. Second, people update beliefs based on search outcomes. Self-confidence increases or decreases in the right direction, but is less sensitive to new information than predicted by Bayes’ rule. Third, updating affects future search decisions: people are less likely to search as confidence about being a high type falls. Fourth, some search too little, and others search too much, due to wrong beliefs. Fifth, at the end of the experiment a substantial fraction turn down the chance to learn their exact rank. These are overwhelmingly those with low ability, suggesting an aversion to learning that one is one of the worst performers. Given that people are uncertain even in the simple setting of our experiment, our evidence strongly suggests that uncertainty about ability is relevant in more complex, real-world search settings, including search for a job or search for a mate. Focusing on the case of job search, we discuss how our findings can provide a new explanation for various important stylized facts from field evidence.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
自信与探索
标准搜索理论假定,个体确切地知道,与竞争对手相比,他们的搜索能力如何。相反,我们假设搜索者对相对能力是不确定的,这对搜索行为有重要的影响。我们在实验室实验中检验我们的假设。第一个主要发现是,人们基本上不确定自己是成功概率高还是低的类型,这是由能力高于或低于中位数决定的。自信,被定义为一个人自我评估成为高类型的可能性,对于许多低类型来说,自信太高(高于零),对于许多高类型来说,自信太低(低于1)。第二,人们根据搜索结果更新信念。自信在正确的方向上增加或减少,但对新信息的敏感度低于贝叶斯规则所预测的。第三,更新会影响未来的搜索决策:当人们对自己是高智商类型的信心下降时,他们不太可能搜索。第四,由于错误的信念,有些人搜索得太少,有些人搜索得太多。第五,在实验结束时,相当一部分人拒绝了了解他们确切排名的机会。这些学生绝大多数都是能力低下的学生,这表明他们不愿意知道自己是表现最差的学生之一。考虑到人们即使在我们实验的简单环境中也不确定,我们的证据强烈表明,对能力的不确定与更复杂的、现实世界的搜索环境有关,包括找工作或找伴侣。以求职为例,我们讨论了我们的发现如何能从现场证据中为各种重要的程式化事实提供新的解释。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Military Policing Exacerbates Crime and May Increase Human Rights Abuses: A Randomized Controlled Trial in Cali, Colombia Color, Loan Approval, and Crimes: The Dark Side of Mortgage Market Deregulation Time-of-Day and Day-of-Week Variations in Amazon Mechanical Turk Survey Responses Education Equity During COVID-19: Analyzing In-Person Priority Policies for Students with Disabilities Gender Mix and Team Performance: Differences between Exogenously and Endogenously Formed Teams
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1