IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/jeborg/v185y2021icp61-80.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Where do I stand? Assessing researchers’ beliefs about their productivity

Author

Listed:
  • Bertoni, Marco
  • Brunello, Giorgio
  • Checchi, Daniele
  • Rocco, Lorenzo

Abstract

In 2017 the Italian government established the Fund to Finance Basic Research Activities – FFABR – with the purpose of assigning a 3,000-euro research grant to the most productive applicants among eligible assistant and associate professors. We show that many low-productivity researchers applied to the program while many high-productivity ones did not. Our evidence from both a simple structural model of program participation estimated on registry data, and a survey of the eligible population suggests that high-productivity researchers under-estimate their own position in the productivity distribution relative to the assignment threshold, while the opposite holds for low-productivity ones.

Suggested Citation

  • Bertoni, Marco & Brunello, Giorgio & Checchi, Daniele & Rocco, Lorenzo, 2021. "Where do I stand? Assessing researchers’ beliefs about their productivity," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 185(C), pages 61-80.
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:jeborg:v:185:y:2021:i:c:p:61-80
    DOI: 10.1016/j.jebo.2021.02.025
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0167268121000895
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.jebo.2021.02.025?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Moore, Don A. & Cain, Daylian M., 2007. "Overconfidence and underconfidence: When and why people underestimate (and overestimate) the competition," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 103(2), pages 197-213, July.
    2. Manuel Bagues & Mauro Sylos-Labini & Natalia Zinovyeva, 2017. "Does the Gender Composition of Scientific Committees Matter?," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 107(4), pages 1207-1238, April.
    3. Christian Gollier & Alexander Muermann, 2010. "Optimal Choice and Beliefs with Ex Ante Savoring and Ex Post Disappointment," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 56(8), pages 1272-1284, August.
    4. Jason Abaluck & Jonathan Gruber, 2011. "Choice Inconsistencies among the Elderly: Evidence from Plan Choice in the Medicare Part D Program," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 101(4), pages 1180-1210, June.
    5. Hainmueller, Jens, 2012. "Entropy Balancing for Causal Effects: A Multivariate Reweighting Method to Produce Balanced Samples in Observational Studies," Political Analysis, Cambridge University Press, vol. 20(1), pages 25-46, January.
    6. Maria De Paola & Michela Ponzo & Vincenzo Scoppa, 2015. "Gender Differences in Attitudes Towards Competition: Evidence from the Italian Scientific Qualification," CSEF Working Papers 391, Centre for Studies in Economics and Finance (CSEF), University of Naples, Italy.
    7. Kirchler, Erich & Maciejovsky, Boris, 2002. "Simultaneous Over- and Underconfidence: Evidence from Experimental Asset Markets," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 25(1), pages 65-85, July.
    8. Jason Abaluck & Jonathan Gruber, 2011. "Heterogeneity in Choice Inconsistencies among the Elderly: Evidence from Prescription Drug Plan Choice," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 101(3), pages 377-381, May.
    9. Maria De Paola & Vincenzo Scoppa, 2015. "Gender Discrimination and Evaluators’ Gender: Evidence from Italian Academia," Economica, London School of Economics and Political Science, vol. 82(325), pages 162-188, January.
    10. Muriel Niederle & Lise Vesterlund, 2007. "Do Women Shy Away From Competition? Do Men Compete Too Much?," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 122(3), pages 1067-1101.
    11. Carmine Ornaghi & Mirco Tonin, 2018. "Water Tariffs and Consumers' Inaction," CESifo Working Paper Series 6990, CESifo.
    12. Currie, Janet, 2004. "The Take-Up of Social Benefits," IZA Discussion Papers 1103, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    13. Simen G. Enger & Fulvio Castellacci, 2016. "Who gets Horizon 2020 research grants? Propensity to apply and probability to succeed in a two-step analysis," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 109(3), pages 1611-1638, December.
    14. Ali Hortaçsu & Seyed Ali Madanizadeh & Steven L. Puller, 2017. "Power to Choose? An Analysis of Consumer Inertia in the Residential Electricity Market," American Economic Journal: Economic Policy, American Economic Association, vol. 9(4), pages 192-226, November.
    15. Benedetto Lepori & Valerio Veglio & Barbara Heller-Schuh & Thomas Scherngell & Michael Barber, 2015. "Participations to European Framework Programs of higher education institutions and their association with organizational characteristics," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 105(3), pages 2149-2178, December.
    16. Jean-Pierre Benoît & Juan Dubra & Don A. Moore, 2015. "Does The Better-Than-Average Effect Show That People Are Overconfident?: Two Experiments," Journal of the European Economic Association, European Economic Association, vol. 13(2), pages 293-329, April.
    17. Bertrand, Marianne & Shafir, Eldar & Mullainathan, Sendhil, 2006. "Behavioral Economics and Marketing in Aid of Decision Making Among the Poor," Scholarly Articles 2962609, Harvard University Department of Economics.
    18. Ornaghi, Carmine & Tonin, Mirco, 2018. "Water Tariffs and Consumers’ Inaction," Discussion Paper Series In Economics And Econometrics 1802, Economics Division, School of Social Sciences, University of Southampton.
    19. Geuna, Aldo, 1998. "Determinants of university participation in EU-funded R & D cooperative projects," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 26(6), pages 677-687, February.
    20. Jean‐Pierre Benoît & Juan Dubra, 2011. "Apparent Overconfidence," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 79(5), pages 1591-1625, September.
    21. Arni, Patrick & Dragone, Davide & Goette, Lorenz & Ziebarth, Nicolas R., 2021. "Biased health perceptions and risky health behaviors—Theory and evidence," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 76(C).
    22. Jouini, Elyès & Karehnke, Paul & Napp, Clotilde, 2018. "Stereotypes, underconfidence and decision-making with an application to gender and math," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 148(C), pages 34-45.
    23. Friehe, Tim & Pannenberg, Markus, 2019. "Overconfidence over the lifespan: Evidence from Germany," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 74(C).
    24. Susan Dynarski & Judith Scott-Clayton, 2013. "Financial Aid Policy: Lessons from Research," NBER Working Papers 18710, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    25. Jason Abaluck & Jonathan Gruber, 2016. "Evolving Choice Inconsistencies in Choice of Prescription Drug Insurance," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 106(8), pages 2145-2184, August.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Bertoni, Marco & Brunello, Giorgio & Checchi, Daniele & Rocco, Lorenzo, 2020. "Where Do I Stand? Assessing Researchers' Beliefs about Their Relative Productivity," IZA Discussion Papers 13637, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    2. Cheung, Stephen L. & Johnstone, Lachlan, 2017. "True Overconfidence, Revealed through Actions: An Experiment," IZA Discussion Papers 10545, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    3. Bucciol, Alessandro & Quercia, Simone & Sconti, Alessia, 2021. "Promoting financial literacy among the elderly: Consequences on confidence," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 87(C).
    4. Arni, Patrick & Dragone, Davide & Goette, Lorenz & Ziebarth, Nicolas R., 2021. "Biased health perceptions and risky health behaviors—Theory and evidence," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 76(C).
    5. Hoyer, Britta & van Huizen, Thomas & Keijzer, Linda & Rezaei, Sarah & Rosenkranz, Stephanie & Westbrock, Bastian, 2020. "Gender, competitiveness, and task difficulty: Evidence from the field," Labour Economics, Elsevier, vol. 64(C).
    6. Bruhin, Adrian & Santos-Pinto, Luís & Staubli, David, 2018. "How do beliefs about skill affect risky decisions?," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 150(C), pages 350-371.
    7. Nie, Peng & Wang, Lu & Dragone, Davide & Lu, Haiyang & Sousa-Poza, Alfonso & Ziebarth, Nicolas R., 2022. "“The better you feel, the harder you fall”: Health perception biases and mental health among Chinese adults during the COVID-19 pandemic," China Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 71(C).
    8. Genakos, Christos & Roumanias, Costas & Valletti, Tommaso, 2023. "Is having an expert “friend” enough? An analysis of consumer switching behavior in mobile telephony," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 213(C), pages 359-372.
    9. Adams, Paul & Hunt, Stefan & Palmer, Christopher & Zaliauskas, Redis, 2021. "Testing the effectiveness of consumer financial disclosure: Experimental evidence from savings accounts," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 141(1), pages 122-147.
    10. Laura Hospido & Luc Laeven & Ana Lamo, 2022. "The Gender Promotion Gap: Evidence from Central Banking," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 104(5), pages 981-996, December.
    11. Zacchia, Giulia, 2016. "Segregation or homologation? Gender differences in recent Italian economic thought," MPRA Paper 72279, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    12. Pierre Deschamps, 2024. "Gender Quotas in Hiring Committees: A Boon or a Bane for Women?," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 70(11), pages 7486-7505, November.
    13. Manuel Bagues & Mauro Sylos-Labini & Natalia Zinovyeva, 2017. "Does the Gender Composition of Scientific Committees Matter?," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 107(4), pages 1207-1238, April.
    14. Merkle, Christoph, 2017. "Financial overconfidence over time: Foresight, hindsight, and insight of investors," Journal of Banking & Finance, Elsevier, vol. 84(C), pages 68-87.
    15. Daniele Checchi & Silvia Poli & Enrico Rettore, 2018. "Does Random Selection of Selectors Improve the Quality of Selected Candidates? An Investigation in the Italian Academia," Italian Economic Journal: A Continuation of Rivista Italiana degli Economisti and Giornale degli Economisti, Springer;Società Italiana degli Economisti (Italian Economic Association), vol. 4(2), pages 211-247, July.
    16. Lee, Ajin & Vabson, Boris, 2024. "The value of improving insurance quality: Evidence from long-run Medicaid attrition," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 94(C).
    17. Keane, Michael & Ketcham, Jonathan & Kuminoff, Nicolai & Neal, Timothy, 2021. "Evaluating consumers’ choices of Medicare Part D plans: A study in behavioral welfare economics," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 222(1), pages 107-140.
    18. Maria De Paola & Michela Ponzo & Vincenzo Scoppa, 2017. "Gender differences in the propensity to apply for promotion: evidence from the Italian Scientific Qualification," Oxford Economic Papers, Oxford University Press, vol. 69(4), pages 986-1009.
    19. Roberto Asmat & Karol J. Borowiecki & Marc T. Law, 2024. "Competing for Equality: Gender Bias Among Juries in International Piano Competitions, 1890-2023," ACEI Working Paper Series AWP-03-2024, Association for Cultural Economics International.
    20. Giovanna d’Adda & Yu Gao & Massimo Tavoni, 2022. "A randomized trial of energy cost information provision alongside energy-efficiency classes for refrigerator purchases," Nature Energy, Nature, vol. 7(4), pages 360-368, April.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Researchers’ productivity; Beliefs; Economics; Ranking; Funding;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • D83 - Microeconomics - - Information, Knowledge, and Uncertainty - - - Search; Learning; Information and Knowledge; Communication; Belief; Unawareness
    • D91 - Microeconomics - - Micro-Based Behavioral Economics - - - Role and Effects of Psychological, Emotional, Social, and Cognitive Factors on Decision Making
    • H5 - Public Economics - - National Government Expenditures and Related Policies
    • I23 - Health, Education, and Welfare - - Education - - - Higher Education; Research Institutions

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:jeborg:v:185:y:2021:i:c:p:61-80. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/jebo .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.