Overconfidence: the roles of gender, public observability and incentives

Hayk Amirkhanyan, Michał Krawczyk, Maciej Wilamowski, Paweł Bokszczanin
{"title":"Overconfidence: the roles of gender, public observability and incentives","authors":"Hayk Amirkhanyan, Michał Krawczyk, Maciej Wilamowski, Paweł Bokszczanin","doi":"10.1007/s40881-023-00149-z","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract In this project, we manipulate the public observability of forecasts and outcomes of a physical task. We explore how these manipulations affect overconfidence (OC). Participants in the experiment are asked to hold a weight after predicting how long they think they could do it for. Comparing the prediction and outcome times (in seconds) yields a measure of OC. We independently vary two dimensions of public observability (of the outcome and of the prediction). Additionally, we manipulate incentives to come up with an accurate prediction. This design allows us to shed light on the mechanism behind male and female OC. Following the existing literature, we formulate several hypotheses regarding the differences in predictions and outcomes for males and females in the presence of the public observability of predictions and outcomes. Our experimental data do not provide support to most of the hypotheses: in particular, there is no evidence of a gender gap in overconfidence. The most robust finding that emerges from our results is that incentives on making correct predictions increase participants’ forecasts on their own performance (by about 24%) and their actual performance as well, but to a lower extent (by about 8%); in addition, incentives to predict correctly in fact increase error for females (by about 33%).","PeriodicalId":91563,"journal":{"name":"Journal of the Economic Science Association","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.9000,"publicationDate":"2023-10-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of the Economic Science Association","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s40881-023-00149-z","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Abstract In this project, we manipulate the public observability of forecasts and outcomes of a physical task. We explore how these manipulations affect overconfidence (OC). Participants in the experiment are asked to hold a weight after predicting how long they think they could do it for. Comparing the prediction and outcome times (in seconds) yields a measure of OC. We independently vary two dimensions of public observability (of the outcome and of the prediction). Additionally, we manipulate incentives to come up with an accurate prediction. This design allows us to shed light on the mechanism behind male and female OC. Following the existing literature, we formulate several hypotheses regarding the differences in predictions and outcomes for males and females in the presence of the public observability of predictions and outcomes. Our experimental data do not provide support to most of the hypotheses: in particular, there is no evidence of a gender gap in overconfidence. The most robust finding that emerges from our results is that incentives on making correct predictions increase participants’ forecasts on their own performance (by about 24%) and their actual performance as well, but to a lower extent (by about 8%); in addition, incentives to predict correctly in fact increase error for females (by about 33%).
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
过度自信:性别、公众观察和激励的作用
在这个项目中,我们操纵一个物理任务的预测和结果的公众可观察性。我们探讨这些操作如何影响过度自信(OC)。实验参与者被要求在预测他们认为自己能坚持多久后,握住一个重物。比较预测时间和结果时间(以秒为单位)可以得到OC的度量。我们独立地改变了公众可观察性(结果和预测)的两个维度。此外,我们还会操纵动机来做出准确的预测。这种设计使我们能够阐明男性和女性OC背后的机制。在现有文献的基础上,我们提出了几个关于在预测和结果的公共可观察性存在下,男性和女性在预测和结果上的差异的假设。我们的实验数据并不能支持大多数假设:特别是,没有证据表明在过度自信方面存在性别差异。从我们的研究结果中得出的最有力的发现是,做出正确预测的激励会提高参与者对自己表现的预测(约24%)和他们的实际表现,但程度较低(约8%);此外,正确预测的激励实际上增加了女性的错误率(约33%)。
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
On the robustness of social norm elicitation Discounting in finite-time bargaining experiments Stress or failure? An experimental protocol to distinguish the environmental determinants of decision-making Internet “piracy” and book sales: a field experiment Eliciting risk preferences in an artefactual field experiment via replication and an alternative approach
×
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