{"title":"‘Update Bias’: Manipulating past information based on the existing circumstances","authors":"Hamza Umer , Takashi Kurosaki","doi":"10.1016/j.socec.2024.102306","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>Many panel surveys elicit information about past events multiple times. It is, however, unclear whether respondents manipulate their past information and update it according to their current circumstances in the later rounds of the panel. We term such a systematic bias in reporting past information as “update bias” in this study. We systematically test the presence of update bias in panel data by comparing teenage religiosity obtained from adults first in 2019 and later in 2022 in the Netherlands. Respondents who become more (less) religious in 2022 than 2019 are likelier to report a higher (lower) teenage religiosity in 2022. Even when we use data with a narrower gap (2019 and 2020 survey waves), we still obtain similar results. Overall, the analysis provides strong evidence for update bias. We suggest that the theory of cognitive dissonance best explains our findings; individuals manipulate their teenage religiosity to minimize dissonance between the past and current religious state and to obtain a higher satisfaction. Unlike predominant existing literature that argues people modify their current beliefs according to previous anchors, we provide contrary evidence where people manipulate their past beliefs following their current circumstances.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":51637,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.6000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics","FirstCategoryId":"96","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2214804324001435","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"经济学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ECONOMICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Many panel surveys elicit information about past events multiple times. It is, however, unclear whether respondents manipulate their past information and update it according to their current circumstances in the later rounds of the panel. We term such a systematic bias in reporting past information as “update bias” in this study. We systematically test the presence of update bias in panel data by comparing teenage religiosity obtained from adults first in 2019 and later in 2022 in the Netherlands. Respondents who become more (less) religious in 2022 than 2019 are likelier to report a higher (lower) teenage religiosity in 2022. Even when we use data with a narrower gap (2019 and 2020 survey waves), we still obtain similar results. Overall, the analysis provides strong evidence for update bias. We suggest that the theory of cognitive dissonance best explains our findings; individuals manipulate their teenage religiosity to minimize dissonance between the past and current religious state and to obtain a higher satisfaction. Unlike predominant existing literature that argues people modify their current beliefs according to previous anchors, we provide contrary evidence where people manipulate their past beliefs following their current circumstances.
期刊介绍:
The Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly the Journal of Socio-Economics) welcomes submissions that deal with various economic topics but also involve issues that are related to other social sciences, especially psychology, or use experimental methods of inquiry. Thus, contributions in behavioral economics, experimental economics, economic psychology, and judgment and decision making are especially welcome. The journal is open to different research methodologies, as long as they are relevant to the topic and employed rigorously. Possible methodologies include, for example, experiments, surveys, empirical work, theoretical models, meta-analyses, case studies, and simulation-based analyses. Literature reviews that integrate findings from many studies are also welcome, but they should synthesize the literature in a useful manner and provide substantial contribution beyond what the reader could get by simply reading the abstracts of the cited papers. In empirical work, it is important that the results are not only statistically significant but also economically significant. A high contribution-to-length ratio is expected from published articles and therefore papers should not be unnecessarily long, and short articles are welcome. Articles should be written in a manner that is intelligible to our generalist readership. Book reviews are generally solicited but occasionally unsolicited reviews will also be published. Contact the Book Review Editor for related inquiries.