Abstract
How do individuals’ beliefs respond to ego-relevant information? After receiving noisy, but unbiased performance feedback, participants in an experiment overestimate their own scores on a quiz and believe their feedback to be ‘unlucky’, estimating that it under-represents their score by 13%. However, they exhibit no such overconfidence in non-ego-relevant beliefs—in this case, estimates of others’ scores. Comparing subjects’ belief-updating to the Bayesian benchmark, we find that this ‘unlucky feeling’ is largely due to overconfident priors, with biased updating driving overconfidence only among the participants with the worst-calibrated beliefs. This suggests that social comparisons contribute to the biased response to feedback on relative performance observed in other studies. While feedback improves performance estimates, this learning does not translate into improved estimates of subsequent performances. This suggests that beliefs about ability are updated differently than beliefs about a particular performance, contributing to the persistence of overconfidence.
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
