Abstract

We test the hypothesis that strategic interactions foster overconfidence. We experimentally compare an environment where players have an incentive to overstate their own ability to deter competitors, with one where this incentive is removed. We find that overconfidence persists in the former environment but vanishes in the latter. The persistence of overconfidence in the strategic environment is driven by three mechanisms. First, players who win uncontested update their confidence as if they had won in actual competition. Second, in contrast, individuals who do not compete do not update their confidence, thus creating an asymmetry in updating. Third, inflated confidence signals of ability are “contagious” because they affect how their receivers update their confidence. We provide empirical evidence that these mechanisms can explain stylized facts on overconfidence such as the Dunning–Kruger effect. We also discuss implications for organizational design and management.

Full Text
Paper version not known

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 call

Disclaimer: 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.