IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/vrs/irjman/v40y2020i1p61-73n1.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Perceived self-efficacy of students in a business simulation game

Author

Listed:
  • Dumblekar Vinod

    (MANTIS, New Delhi, India)

  • Dhar Upinder

    (Shri Vaishnav Vidyapeeth Vishwavidyalaya, Indore, India)

Abstract

Self-efficacy is an individual's confidence in the personal ability to complete a task under specified conditions. Game self-efficacy is the belief of game players that they would win in a business simulation game competition. To understand the composites of such belief, an instrument of 30 statements was developed and statistically tested on 227 undergraduate students at the end of a business simulation game competition. The factor analysis produced eight factors of perceived game self-efficacy, namely, innovation, experimentation, conviction, openness, focus, proactivity, conceptualisation and determination. These factors have significant research implications for goal-oriented behaviour, goal setting and performance enhancement at work and in games and competitions, and in developing simulation games.

Suggested Citation

  • Dumblekar Vinod & Dhar Upinder, 2020. "Perceived self-efficacy of students in a business simulation game," The Irish Journal of Management, Sciendo, vol. 40(1), pages 61-73, July.
    • Handle: RePEc:vrs:irjman:v:40:y:2020:i:1:p:61-73:n:1
    DOI: 10.2478/ijm-2021-0004
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.2478/ijm-2021-0004
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.2478/ijm-2021-0004?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
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Roland Bénabou & Jean Tirole, 2016. "Mindful Economics: The Production, Consumption, and Value of Beliefs," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 30(3), pages 141-164, Summer.
    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. Francesco Capozza & Ingar Haaland & Christopher Roth & Johannes Wohlfart, 2021. "Studying Information Acquisition in the Field: A Practical Guide and Review," CEBI working paper series 21-15, University of Copenhagen. Department of Economics. The Center for Economic Behavior and Inequality (CEBI).
    2. Christoph Drobner, 2020. "Motivated Beliefs and Anticipation of Uncertainty Resolution," Munich Papers in Political Economy 07, Munich School of Politics and Public Policy and the School of Management at the Technical University of Munich.
    3. Fang, Feifan & Zhao, Yinyu & Xi, Zemiao & Han, Xinru & Zhu, Yuchun, 2023. "The impact of famine experience on middle-aged and elderly individuals’ food consumption: Evidence from China," The Journal of the Economics of Ageing, Elsevier, vol. 26(C).
    4. Carlos Alós-Ferrer & Georg D. Granic, 2023. "Does choice change preferences? An incentivized test of the mere choice effect," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 26(3), pages 499-521, July.
    5. Barrera, Oscar & Guriev, Sergei & Henry, Emeric & Zhuravskaya, Ekaterina, 2020. "Facts, alternative facts, and fact checking in times of post-truth politics," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 182(C).
    6. Samahita, Margaret & Holm, Håkan J., 2020. "Mining for Mood Effect in the Field," Working Papers 2020:2, Lund University, Department of Economics.
    7. Ester Faia & Andreas Fuster & Vincenzo Pezone & Basit Zafar, 2024. "Biases in Information Selection and Processing: Survey Evidence from the Pandemic," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 106(3), pages 829-847, May.
    8. Banerjee, Ritwik & Gupta, Nabanita Datta & Villeval, Marie Claire, 2020. "Feedback spillovers across tasks, self-confidence and competitiveness," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 123(C), pages 127-170.
    9. Edika Quispe-Torreblanca & David Hume & John Gathergood & George Loewenstein & Neil Stewart, 2023. "At the Top of the Mind: Peak Prices and the Disposition Effect," Discussion Papers 2023-09, The Centre for Decision Research and Experimental Economics, School of Economics, University of Nottingham.
    10. Huseynov, Samir & Palma, Marco A. & Ahmad, Ghufran, 2021. "Does the magnitude of relative calorie distance affect food consumption?," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 188(C), pages 530-551.
    11. Boxho, Claire & Donald, Aletheia & Goldstein, Markus & Montalvao, Joao & Rouanet, Léa, 2020. "Assortative matching in Africa: Evidence from rural Mozambique, Côte d’Ivoire, and Malawi," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 187(C).
    12. Kevin C. Corinth, 2016. "A price theory of altruistic identity," AEI Economics Working Papers 901391, American Enterprise Institute.
    13. Burro, Giovanni & Castagnetti, Alessandro, 2024. "The ego is no fool: Absence of motivated belief formation in strategic interactions," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 109(C).
    14. Andras Molnar & Shereen J. Chaudhry & George Loewenstein, 2020. ""It's Not about the Money. It's about Sending a Message!" Unpacking the Components of Revenge," CESifo Working Paper Series 8102, CESifo.
    15. Bicchieri, Cristina & Dimant, Eugen & Xiao, Erte, 2021. "Deviant or wrong? The effects of norm information on the efficacy of punishment," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 188(C), pages 209-235.
    16. Castagnetti, Alessandro & Schmacker, Renke, 2022. "Protecting the ego: Motivated information selection and updating," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 142(C).
    17. Tianshu Sun & Sean J. Taylor, 2020. "Displaying things in common to encourage friendship formation: A large randomized field experiment," Quantitative Marketing and Economics (QME), Springer, vol. 18(3), pages 237-271, September.
    18. Conti, G.; & Giustinelli, P.;, 2022. "For Better or Worse? Subjective Expectations and Cost-Benefit Trade-Offs in Health Behavior: An Application to Lockdown Compliance in the United Kingdom," Health, Econometrics and Data Group (HEDG) Working Papers 22/14, HEDG, c/o Department of Economics, University of York.
    19. Besancenot, Damien & Vranceanu, Radu, 2018. "Crowdfunding with overenthusiastic investors : a global game model," ESSEC Working Papers WP1802, ESSEC Research Center, ESSEC Business School.
    20. Assenza, Tiziana, 2021. "The Ability to 'Distill the Truth'," TSE Working Papers 21-1280, Toulouse School of Economics (TSE), revised Mar 2022.

    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:vrs:irjman:v:40:y:2020:i:1:p:61-73:n:1. 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: Peter Golla (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.sciendo.com .

    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.