IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/jobhdp/v105y2008i2p201-220.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

How egocentrism and optimism change in response to feedback in repeated competitions

Author

Listed:
  • Rose, Jason P.
  • Windschitl, Paul D.

Abstract

People tend to egocentrically focus on how adverse or beneficial conditions in competitions affect the self, while inadequately considering the comparable impact on opponents. This leads to overoptimism for a victory in easy tasks and underoptimism in hard tasks. Four experiments investigated whether experience and performance feedback in a multi-round competition would influence egocentric weighting and optimism biases across rounds. The results indicated that egocentric weighting and optimism biases decreased across rounds. However, this apparent debiasing occurred under restrictive conditions, and participants did not generalize their learned, non-egocentric tendencies to novel contexts. The roles of differential confidence and surface/structural similarity are discussed as reasons why optimism biases were generally pervasive.

Suggested Citation

  • Rose, Jason P. & Windschitl, Paul D., 2008. "How egocentrism and optimism change in response to feedback in repeated competitions," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 105(2), pages 201-220, March.
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:jobhdp:v:105:y:2008:i:2:p:201-220
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0749-5978(07)00082-9
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    ---><---

    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. Ball, Sheryl B. & Bazerman, Max H. & Carroll, John S., 1991. "An evaluation of learning in the bilateral winner's curse," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 48(1), pages 1-22, February.
    2. 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.
    3. David M. Grether & James C. Cox, 1996. "The preference reversal phenomenon: Response mode, markets and incentives (*)," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 7(3), pages 381-405.
    4. Van Boven, Leaf & Loewenstein, George & Dunning, David, 2003. "Mispredicting the endowment effect:: Underestimation of owners' selling prices by buyer's agents," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 51(3), pages 351-365, July.
    5. Kagel, John H. & Levin, Dan, 1986. "The Winner's Curse and Public Information in Common Value Auctions," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 76(5), pages 894-920, December.
    6. Arkes, Hal R. & Christensen, Caryn & Lai, Cheryl & Blumer, Catherine, 1987. "Two methods of reducing overconfidence," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 39(1), pages 133-144, February.
    7. Moore, Don A., 2007. "Not so above average after all: When people believe they are worse than average and its implications for theories of bias in social comparison," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 102(1), pages 42-58, January.
    8. Dan Lovallo & Colin Camerer, 1999. "Overconfidence and Excess Entry: An Experimental Approach," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 89(1), pages 306-318, March.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Jason P. Rose & Paul D. Windschitl & Andrew R. Smith, 2012. "Debiasing egocentrism and optimism biases in repeated competitions," Judgment and Decision Making, Society for Judgment and Decision Making, vol. 7(6), pages 761-767, November.
    2. repec:cup:judgdm:v:7:y:2012:i:6:p:761-767 is not listed on IDEAS
    3. Murad, Zahra & Starmer, Chris, 2021. "Confidence snowballing and relative performance feedback," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 190(C), pages 550-572.
    4. Daylian M. Cain & Don A. Moore & Uriel Haran, 2015. "Making sense of overconfidence in market entry," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 36(1), pages 1-18, January.

    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. Radzevick, Joseph R. & Moore, Don A., 2008. "Myopic biases in competitions," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 107(2), pages 206-218, November.
    2. Murad, Zahra & Starmer, Chris, 2021. "Confidence snowballing and relative performance feedback," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 190(C), pages 550-572.
    3. Ryvkin, Dmitry & Krajč, Marian & Ortmann, Andreas, 2012. "Are the unskilled doomed to remain unaware?," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 33(5), pages 1012-1031.
    4. Robert Libby & Kristina Rennekamp, 2012. "Self‐Serving Attribution Bias, Overconfidence, and the Issuance of Management Forecasts," Journal of Accounting Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 50(1), pages 197-231, March.
    5. Jean‐Pierre Benoît & Juan Dubra, 2011. "Apparent Overconfidence," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 79(5), pages 1591-1625, September.
    6. Moore, Don A. & Klein, William M.P., 2008. "Use of absolute and comparative performance feedback in absolute and comparative judgments and decisions," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 107(1), pages 60-74, September.
    7. Brown, Jason L. & Farrington, Sukari & Sprinkle, Geoffrey B., 2016. "Biased self-assessments, feedback, and employees' compensation plan choices," Accounting, Organizations and Society, Elsevier, vol. 54(C), pages 45-59.
    8. Marco Serena, 2019. "A Game-Free Microfoundation of Mutual Optimism," Games, MDPI, vol. 10(4), pages 1-14, September.
    9. Mathew L. A. Hayward & Dean A. Shepherd & Dale Griffin, 2006. "A Hubris Theory of Entrepreneurship," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 52(2), pages 160-172, February.
    10. Samuel A Swift & Don A Moore & Zachariah S Sharek & Francesca Gino, 2013. "Inflated Applicants: Attribution Errors in Performance Evaluation by Professionals," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 8(7), pages 1-15, July.
    11. Hales, Jeffrey, 2009. "Are investors really willing to agree to disagree? An experimental investigation of how disagreement and attention to disagreement affect trading behavior," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 108(2), pages 230-241, March.
    12. Ellen Garbarino & Robert Slonim, 2007. "Preferences and decision errors in the winner’s curse," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 34(3), pages 241-257, June.
    13. George Deltas & Richard Engelbrecht-Wiggans, 2005. "Naive Bidding," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 51(3), pages 328-338, March.
    14. Joon Mahn Lee & Jung Chul Park & Guoli Chen, 2023. "A cognitive perspective on real options investment: CEO overconfidence," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 44(4), pages 1084-1110, April.
    15. Erik Eyster & Matthew Rabin, 2005. "Cursed Equilibrium," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 73(5), pages 1623-1672, September.
    16. Vincent P. Crawford & Nagore Iriberri, 2007. "Level-k Auctions: Can a Nonequilibrium Model of Strategic Thinking Explain the Winner's Curse and Overbidding in Private-Value Auctions?," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 75(6), pages 1721-1770, November.
    17. Arturs Kalnins, 2005. "Overestimation and Venture Survival: An Empirical Analysis of Development Commitments in International Master Franchising Ventures," Journal of Economics & Management Strategy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 14(4), pages 933-953, December.
    18. Glaser, Markus & Weber, Martin, 2007. "Why inexperienced investors do not learn: They do not know their past portfolio performance," Finance Research Letters, Elsevier, vol. 4(4), pages 203-216, December.
    19. Jean-Pierre Benoît & Juan Dubra & Giorgia Romagnoli, 2022. "Belief Elicitation When More than Money Matters: Controlling for "Control"," American Economic Journal: Microeconomics, American Economic Association, vol. 14(3), pages 837-888, August.
    20. Zahra Murad & Martin Sefton & Chris Starmer, 2016. "How do risk attitudes affect measured confidence?," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 52(1), pages 21-46, February.

    More about this item

    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:jobhdp:v:105:y:2008:i:2:p:201-220. 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/obhdp .

    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.