Managing Self-Confidence: Theory and Experimental Evidence

References

• Adebambo BN, Yan XS (2016) Momentum, reversals, and fund manager overconfidence. Financial Management 45(3):609–639.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Akerlof GA, Dickens WT (1982) The economic consequences of cognitive dissonance. Amer. Econom. Rev. 72(3):307–319.Google Scholar
• Allen F (1987) Discovering personal probabilities when utility functions are unknown. Management Sci. 33(4):542–544.Link, Google Scholar
• Arellano M, Bond S (1991) Some tests of specification for panel data: Monte Carlo evidence and an application to employment equations. Rev. Econom. Stud. 58(2):277–297.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Arellano M, Honore B (2001) Panel data models: Some recent developments. Heckman JJ, Leamer EE, eds. Handbook of Econometrics, vol. 5 (Elsevier, Amsterdam), 3229–3296.Google Scholar
• Barber BM, Odean T (2001) Boys will be boys: Gender, overconfidence, and common stock investment. Quart. J. Econom. 116(1):261–292.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Barron K (2021) Belief updating: Does the ‘good-news, bad-news’ asymmetry extend to purely financial domains? Experiment. Econom. 24(1):31–58.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Benabou R, Tirole J (2002) Self-confidence and personal motivation. Quart. J. Econom. 117(3):871–915.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Benjamin DJ (2019) Errors in probabilistic reasoning and judgment biases. Bernheim BD, DellaVigna S, Laibson D, eds. Handbook of Behavioral Economics: Applications and Foundations, vol. 2 (North-Holland, Amsterdam), 69–186.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Benoit JP, Dubra J (2011) Apparent overconfidence. Econometrica 79(5):1591–1625.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Brocas I, Carrillo JD (2000) The value of information when preferences are dynamically inconsistent. Eur. Econom. Rev. 44(4-6):1104–1115.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Brunnermeier MK, Parker JA (2005) Optimal expectations. Amer. Econom. Rev. 95(4):1092–1118.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Burks SV, Carpenter JP, Götte L, Rustichini A (2013) Overconfidence and social signalling. Rev. Econom. Stud. 80(3):949–983.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Buser T, Gerhards L, van der Weele J (2018) Responsiveness to feedback as a personal trait. J. Risk Uncertainty 56(2):165–192.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Camerer C, Lovallo D (1999) Overconfidence and excess entry: An experimental approach. Amer. Econom. Rev. 89(1):306–318.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Caplin A, Leahy J (2001) Psychological expected utility theory and anticipatory feelings. Quart. J. Econom. 116(1):55–79.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Carrillo JD, Mariotti T (2000) Strategic ignorance as a self-disciplining device. Rev. Econom. Stud. 67:529–544.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Charness G, Levin D (2005) When optimal choices feel wrong: A laboratory study of Bayesian updating, complexity, and affect. Amer. Econom. Rev. 95(4):1300–1309.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Charness G, Rustichini A, van de Ven J (2018) Self-confidence and strategic behavior. Experiment. Econom. 21(1):72–98.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Church E, Lambin S, Yu L (2012) Delivering results: Growth and value in a volatile world, 15th Annual Global CEO Survey 2012. Report, PricewaterhouseCoopers, Belfast, Northern Ireland.Google Scholar
• Compte O, Postlewaite A (2004) Confidence-enhanced performance. Amer. Econom. Rev. 94(5):1536–1557.Crossref, 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
• Daniel K, Hirshleifer D, Subrahmanyam A (1998) Investor psychology and security market under- and overreactions. J. Finance 53(6):1839–1885.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Danz D, Vesterlund L, Wilson AJ (2020) Belief elicitation: Limiting truth telling with information on incentives. NBER Working Paper 27327, National Bureau of Economic Research, Cambridge, MA.Crossref, Google Scholar
• De Long JB, Shleifer A, Waldmann R (1991) The survival of noise traders in financial markets. J. Bus. 64(1):1–19.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Descamps A, Massoni S, Page L (2021) Learning to hesitate. Experiment. Econom., ePub ahead of print, June 22, https://doi.org/10.1007/s10683-021-09718-7.Google Scholar
• Drobner C (2022) Motivated beliefs and anticipation of uncertainty resolution. Amer. Econom. Rev. Insights. Forthcoming.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Eil D, Rao JM (2011) The good news-bad news effect: Asymmetric processing of objective information about yourself. Amer. Econom. J. Microeconom. 3(2):114–138.Crossref, Google Scholar
• El-Gamal M, Grether D (1995) Are people Bayesian? Uncovering behavioral strategies. J. Amer. Statist. Assoc. 90(432):1137–1145.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Englmaier F (2006) A brief survey on overconfidence. Satish D, ed. Behavioral Finance—An Introduction (ICFAI University Press, Hyderabad, India), 188–201.Google Scholar
• Ertac S (2011) Does self-relevance affect information processing? Experimental evidence on the response to performance and non-performance feedback. J. Econom. Behav. Organ. 80(3):532–545.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Fischhoff B, Beyth-Marom R (1983) Hypothesis evaluation from a Bayesian perspective. Psych. Rev. 90(3):239–260.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Galasso A, Simcoe TS (2011) CEO overconfidence and innovation. Management Sci. 57(8):1469–1484.Link, Google Scholar
• Gennaioli N, Shleifer A (2010) What comes to mind. Quart. J. Econom. 125(4):1399–1433.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Gilboa I, Schmeidler D (1989) Maxmin expected utility with non-unique prior. J. Math. Econom. 18(2):141–153.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Gotthard-Real A (2017) Desirability and information processing: An experimental study. Econom. Lett. 152:96–99.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Grether DM (1980) Bayes rule as a descriptive model: The representativeness heuristic. Quart. J. Econom. 95(3):537–557.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Grether DM (1992) Testing Bayes rule and the representativeness heuristic: Some experimental evidence. J. Econom. Behav. Organ. 17(1):31–57.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Grossman Z, Owens D (2012) An unlucky feeling: Overconfidence and noisy feedback. J. Econom. Behav. Organ. 84(2):510–524.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Healy PJ (2020) Explaining the BDM—or any random binary choice elicitation mechanism—to subjects. Working paper, Ohio State University, Columbus, OH.Google Scholar
• Healy PJ, Kagel J (2021) Testing elicitation mechanisms via team chat. Working paper, Ohio State University, Columbus, OH.Google Scholar
• Hoelzl E, Rustichini A (2005) Overconfident: Do you put your money on it? Econom. J. 115(503):305–318.Google Scholar
• Hollard G, Massoni S, Vergnaud J-C (2016) In search of good probability assessors: An experimental comparison of elicitation rules for confidence judgments. Theory Decision 80(3):363–387.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Holt CA (1986) Preference reversals and the independence axiom. Amer. Econom. Rev. 76(3):508–515.Google Scholar
• Holt CA, Smith AM (2016) Belief elicitation with a synchronized lottery choice menu that is invariant to risk attitudes. Amer. Econom. J. Microeconom. 8(1):110–139.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Hossain T, Okui R (2013) The binarized scoring rule. Rev. Econom. Stud. 80(3):984–1001.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Kahneman D, Tversky A (1973) On the psychology of prediction. Psych. Rev. 80(4):237–251.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Karni E (2009) A mechanism for eliciting probabilities. Econometrica 77(2):603–606.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Kogan S, Schneider FH, Weber RA (2021) Self-serving biases in beliefs about collective outcomes. ECON Working Paper 379, Department of Economics, University of Zurich, Zurich.Google Scholar
• Kőszegi B (2006) Ego utility, overconfidence, and task choice. J. Eur. Econom. Assoc. 4(4):673–707.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Li M, Petruzzi NC, Zhang J (2017) Overconfident competing newsvendors. Management Sci. 63(8):2637–2646.Link, Google Scholar
• Malmendier U, Tate G (2005) CEO overconfidence and corporate investment. J. Finance 60(6):2661–2700.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Massey C, Wu G (2005) Detecting regime shifts: The causes of under- and overreaction. Management Sci. 51(6):932–947.Link, Google Scholar
• Mayraz G (2019) Priors and desires—a Bayesian model of wishful thinking and cognitive dissonance. Technical report, University of Sydney, Sydney.Google Scholar
• Miller D, Ross M (1975) Self-serving biases in the attribution of causality: Fact or fiction? Psych. Bull. 82(2):213–225.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Mobius MM, Niederle M, Niehaus P, Rosenblat TS (2011) Managing self-confidence: Theory and experimental evidence. NBER Working Paper 17014, National Bureau of Economic Research, Cambridge, MA.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Moore DA, Healy PJ (2008) The trouble with overconfidence. Psych. Rev. 115(2):502–517.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Mullainathan S (2002) A memory-based model of bounded rationality. Quart. J. Econom. 117(3):735–774.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Nickell SJ (1981) Biases in dynamic models with fixed effects. Econometrica 49(6):1417–1426.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Niederle M, Vesterlund L (2007) Do women shy away from competition? Do men compete too much? Quart. J. Econom. 122(3):1067–1101.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Odean T (1998) Are investors reluctant to realize their losses? J. Finance 53(5):1775–1798.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Offerman T, Sonnemans J, Van de Kuilen G, Wakker P (2009) A truth serum for non-Bayesians: Correcting proper scoring rules for risk attitudes. Rev. Econom. Stud. 76(29):1461–1489.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Oprea R, Yuksel S (2021) Social exchange of motivated beliefs. J. Eur. Econom. Assoc., ePub ahead of print September 14, https://doi.org/10.1093/jeea/jvab035.Google Scholar
• Rabin M (1998) Psychology and economics. J. Econom. Lit. 36(1):11–46.Google Scholar
• Rabin M (2002) Inference by believers in the law of small numbers. Quart. J. Econom. 117(3):775–816.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Rabin M, Schrag J (1999) First impressions matter: A model of confirmatory bias. Quart. J. Econom. 114(1):37–82.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Santos-Pinto L, Sobel J (2005) A model of positive self-image in subjective assessments. Amer. Econom. Rev. 95(5):1386–1402.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Schwardmann P, van der Weele J (2019) Deception and self-deception. Nat. Human Behav. 3(10):1055–1061.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Slovic P, Lichtenstein S (1971) Comparison of Bayesian and regression approaches to the study of information processing in judgment. Organ. Behav. Human Performance 6(6):649–744.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Stein C (1972) A bound for the error in the normal approximation to the distribution of a sum of dependent random variables. Le Cam LM, Neyman J, Scott EL, eds. Proc. Sixth Berkeley Sympos. Math. Statist. Probab. (University of California Press, Berkeley, CA), 583–602.Google Scholar
• Stock JH, Yogo M (2005) Testing for weak instruments in linear IV regression. Andrews DWK, Stock J, eds. Identification and Inference for Econometric Models: Essays in Honor of Thomas Rothenberg (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK), 80–108.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Svenson O (1981) Are we all less risky and more skillful than our fellow drivers? Acta Psych. 47:143–148.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Van den Steen E (2004) Rational overoptimism (and other biases). Amer. Econom. Rev. 94(4):1141–1151.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Van den Steen E (2011) Overconfidence by Bayesian-rational agents. Management Sci. 57(5):884–896.Link, Google Scholar
• Wetzel C (1982) Self-serving biases in attribution: A Bayesian analysis. J. Personality Soc. Psych. 43(2):197–209.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Wilson A (2014) Bounded memory and biases in information processing. Econometrica 82(6):2257–2294.Google Scholar
• Wilson AJ, Vespa E (2017) Paired-uniform scoring: Implementing a binarized scoring rule with non-mathematical language. Working paper, University of Pittsburgh.Google Scholar
• Wiswall M, Zafar B (2014) Determinants of college major choice: Identification using an information experiment. Rev. Econom. Stud. 82(2):791–824.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Wolosin RJ, Sherman S, Till A (1973) Effects of cooperation and competition on responsibility attribution after success and failure. J. Experiment. Soc. Psych. 9:220–235.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Zábojník J (2004) A model of rational bias in self-assessments. Econom. Theory 23(2):259–282.Crossref, Google Scholar