Unpacking Overconfident Behavior When Betting on Oneself

References

• Abdellaoui M, Baillon A, Placido L, Wakker PP (2011) The rich domain of uncertainty: Source functions and their experimental implementation. Amer. Econom. Rev. 101(2):695–723.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Abdellaoui M, Bleichrodt H, Kemel E, l’Haridon O (2021) Measuring beliefs under ambiguity. Oper. Res. 69(2):599–612.Link, Google Scholar
• Alicke MD, Klotz ML, Breitenbecher DL, Yurak TJ, Vredenburg DS (1995) Personal contact, individuation, and the better-than-average effect. J. Personality Soc. Psych. 68(5):804.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Armantier O, Treich N (2013) Eliciting beliefs: Proper scoring rules, incentives, stakes and hedging. Eur. Econom. Rev. 62:17–40.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Atanasov P, Rescober P, Stone E, Swift SA, Servan-Schreiber E, Tetlock P, Ungar L, et al. (2017) Distilling the wisdom of crowds: Prediction markets vs. prediction polls. Management Sci. 63(3):691–706.Link, Google Scholar
• Baillon A (2008) Eliciting subjective probabilities through exchangeable events: An advantage and a limitation. Decision Anal. 5(2):76–87.Link, Google Scholar
• Baillon A, Bleichrodt H (2015) Testing ambiguity models through the measurement of probabilities for gains and losses. Amer. Econom. J. Microeconom. 7(2):77–100.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Bengtsson C, Persson M, Willenhag P (2005) Gender and overconfidence. Econom. Lett. 86(2):199–203.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Berry DA (1996) Statistics: A Bayesian Perspective (Duxbury Press, Belmont, CA).Google Scholar
• Blavatskyy PR (2009) Betting on own knowledge: Experimental test of overconfidence. J. Risk Uncertainty 38(1):39–49.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Bleichrodt H, Grant S, Yang J (2023) Testing hurwicz expected utility. Econometrica 91(4):1393–1416.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Bruhin A, Santos-Pinto L, Staubli D (2018) How do beliefs about skill affect risky decisions? J. Econom. Behav. Organ. 150:350–371.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Bryan KA, Tilcsik A, Zhu B (2017) Which entrepreneurs are coachable and why? Amer. Econom. Rev. 107(5):312–316.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Burks SV, Carpenter JP, Goette L, Rustichini A (2013) Overconfidence and social signalling. Rev. Econom. Stud. 80(3):949–983.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Camuffo A, Cordova A, Gambardella A, Spina C (2020) A scientific approach to entrepreneurial decision making: Evidence from a randomized control trial. Management Sci. 66(2):564–586.Link, Google Scholar
• Cerroni S, Notaro S, Shaw WD (2012) Eliciting and estimating valid subjective probabilities: An experimental investigation of the exchangeability method. J. Econom. Behav. Organ. 84(1):201–215.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Charness G, Gneezy U, Rasocha V (2021) Experimental methods: Eliciting beliefs. J. Econom. Behav. Organ. 189:234–256.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Chew SH, Sagi JS (2006) Event exchangeability: Probabilistic sophistication without continuity or monotonicity. Econometrica 74(3):771–786.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Chew SH, Sagi JS (2008) Small worlds: Modeling attitudes toward sources of uncertainty. J. Econom. Theory 139(1):1–24.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Chow CC, Sarin RK (2001) Comparative ignorance and the ellsberg paradox. J. Risk Uncertainty 22(2):129–139.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Clark J, Friesen L (2009) Overconfidence in forecasts of own performance: An experimental study. Econom. J. (London) 119(534):229–251.Google Scholar
• Coutts A (2019) Good news and bad news are still news: Experimental evidence on belief updating. Experiment. Econom. 22(2):369–395.Crossref, Google Scholar
• De Bondt WF, Thaler RH (1995) Financial decision-making in markets and firms: A behavioral perspective. Handbook Oper. Res. Management Sci. 9:385–410.Google Scholar
• de Lara Resende JG, Wu G (2010) Competence effects for choices involving gains and losses. J. Risk Uncertainty 40(2):109–132.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Dimmock SG, Kouwenberg R, Wakker PP (2016) Ambiguity attitudes in a large representative sample. Management Sci. 62(5):1363–1380.Link, Google Scholar
• Ellsberg D (1961) Risk, ambiguity, and the savage axioms. Quart. J. Econom. 75(4):643–669.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Feiler D, Tong J (2022) From noise to bias: Overconfidence in new product forecasting. Management Sci. 68(6):4685–4702.Link, Google Scholar
• Fox CR, Rottenstreich Y (2003) Partition priming in judgment under uncertainty. Psych. Sci. 14(3):195–200.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Fox CR, Tversky A (1995) Ambiguity aversion and comparative ignorance. Quart. J. Econom. 110(3):585–603.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Fox CR, Tversky A (1998) A belief-based account of decision under uncertainty. Management Sci. 44(7):879–895.Link, Google Scholar
• Fox CR, Ülkümen G (2011) Distinguishing two dimensions of uncertainty. Brun W, Kirkebøen G, Montgomery H, eds. Essays in Judgment and Decision Making (Universitetsforlaget, Oslo, Norway), 21–35.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Fox CR, Goedde-Menke M, Tannenbaum D (2021) Ambiguity aversion and epistemic uncertainty. Preprint, submitted September 16, https://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3922716.Google Scholar
• Grieco D, Hogarth RM (2009) Overconfidence in absolute and relative performance: The regression hypothesis and Bayesian updating. J. Econom. Psych. 30(5):756–771.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Gutierrez C, Åstebro T, Obloj T (2020) The impact of overconfidence and ambiguity attitude on market entry. Organ. Sci. 31(2):308–329.Link, Google Scholar
• Heath C, Tversky A (1991) Preference and belief: Ambiguity and competence in choice under uncertainty. J. Risk Uncertainty 4(1):5–28.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Herz H, Schunk D, Zehnder C (2014) How do judgmental overconfidence and overoptimism shape innovative activity? Games Econom. Behav. 83:1–23.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Hoelzl E, Rustichini A (2005) Overconfident: Do you put your money on it? Econom. J. (London) 115(503):305–318.Google Scholar
• Holt CA, Smith AM (2009) An update on Bayesian updating. J. Econom. Behav. Organ. 69(2):125–134.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Hooshangi S, Loewenstein G (2018) The impact of idea generation and potential appropriation on entrepreneurship: An experimental study. Management Sci. 64(1):64–82.Link, Google Scholar
• Jiao P (2020) Payoff-based belief distortion. Econom. J. (London) 130(629):1416–1444.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Kahneman D (2011) Thinking, Fast and Slow (Farrar, Straus and Giroux, New York).Google Scholar
• Kennedy JA, Anderson C, Moore DA (2013) When overconfidence is revealed to others: Testing the status-enhancement theory of overconfidence. Organ. Behav. Human Decision Processes 122(2):266–279.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Keppe H-J, Weber M (1995) Judged knowledge and ambiguity aversion. Theory Decision 39(1):51–77.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Kilka M, Weber M (2000) Home bias in international stock return expectations. J. Psych. Financial Markets 1(3–4):176–192.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Kilka M, Weber M (2001) What determines the shape of the probability weighting function under uncertainty? Management Sci. 47(12):1712–1726.Link, Google Scholar
• Klein WM, Cerully JL, Monin MM, Moore DA (2010) Ability, chance, and ambiguity aversion: Revisiting the competence hypothesis. Judgment Decision Making 5(3):192.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Kocher MG, Lahno AM, Trautmann ST (2018) Ambiguity aversion is not universal. Eur. Econom. Rev. 101:268–283.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Li C, Turmunkh U, Wakker PP (2020) Social and strategic ambiguity vs. betrayal aversion. Games Econom. Behav. 123:272–287.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Machina MJ, Schmeidler D (1992) A more robust definition of subjective probability. Econometrica 60(4):745–780.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Malmendier U, Tate G (2008) Who makes acquisitions? CEO overconfidence and the market’s reaction. J. Financial Econom. 89(1):20–43.Crossref, Google Scholar
• McGraw AP, Mellers BA, Ritov I (2004) The affective costs of overconfidence. J. Behav. Decision Making 17(4):281–295.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Menapace L, Colson G, Raffaelli R (2015) Climate change beliefs and perceptions of agricultural risks: An application of the exchangeability method. Global Environmental Change 35:70–81.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Möbius MM, Niederle M, Niehaus P, Rosenblat TS (2022) Managing self-confidence: Theory and experimental evidence. Management Sci. 68(11):7793–7817.Google Scholar
• Moore DA, Healy PJ (2008) The trouble with overconfidence. Psych. Rev. 115(2):502–517.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Moore DA, Schatz D (2017) The three faces of overconfidence. Soc. Personality Psych. Compass 11(8):e12331.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Murad Z, Sefton M, Starmer C (2016) How do risk attitudes affect measured confidence? J. Risk Uncertainty 52(1):21–46.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Offerman T, Sonnemans J, Van de Kuilen G, Wakker PP (2009) A truth serum for non-Bayesians: Correcting proper scoring rules for risk attitudes. Rev. Econom. Stud. 76(4):1461–1489.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Raven J, Raven JC, Court JH (2003) Manual for Raven’s progressive matrices and vocabulary scales. The advanced progressive matrices. Harcourt Assessment, San Antonio, TX.Google Scholar
• Rottenstreich Y, Tversky A (1997) Unpacking, repacking, and anchoring: Advances in support theory. Psych. Rev. 104(2):406.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Santos-Pinto L, de la Rosa LE (2020) Overconfidence in labor markets. Handbook of Labor (Human Resources and Population Economics), 1–42.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Schulz JF, Thöni C (2016) Overconfidence and career choice. PLoS One 11(1):e0145126.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Soll JB, Palley AB, Rader CA (2022) The bad thing about good advice: Understanding when and how advice exacerbates overconfidence. Management Sci. 68(4):2949–2969.Link, Google Scholar
• Sonsino D, Lahav Y, Roth Y (2022) Reaching for returns in retail structured investment. Management Sci. 68(1):466–486.Link, Google Scholar
• Suantak L, Bolger F, Ferrell WR (1996) The hard–easy effect in subjective probability calibration. Organ. Behav. Human Decision Processes 67(2):201–221.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Tannenbaum D, Fox CR, Ülkümen G (2017) Judgment extremity and accuracy under epistemic vs. aleatory uncertainty. Management Sci. 63(2):497–518.Link, Google Scholar
• Trautmann ST, van de Kuilen G (2015a) Ambiguity attitudes. The Wiley Blackwell Handbook of Judgment and Decision Making (John Wiley & Sons, Hoboken, NJ), 89–116.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Trautmann ST, van de Kuilen G (2015b) Belief elicitation: A horse race among truth serums. Econom. J. (London) 125(589):2116–2135.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Trautmann ST, Vieider FM, Wakker PP (2008) Causes of ambiguity aversion: Known vs. unknown preferences. J. Risk Uncertainty 36(3):225–243.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Tversky A, Fox CR (1995) Weighing risk and uncertainty. Psych. Rev. 102(2):269.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Urbig D, Stauf J, Weitzel U (2009) What is your level of overconfidence? A strictly incentive compatible measurement of absolute and relative overconfidence. Discussion paper series, Tjalling C. Koopmans Research Institute, Utrecht, Netherlands.Google Scholar
• Wakker PP (2004) On the composition of risk preference and belief. Psych. Rev. 111(1):236.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Wakker PP (2010) Prospect Theory: For Risk and Ambiguity (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK).Crossref, Google Scholar
• Zhang SX, Foo M-D, Vassolo RS (2021) The ramifications of effectuation on biases in entrepreneurship: Evidence from a mixed-method approach. J. Bus. Venturing Insights 15:e00238.Crossref, Google Scholar