IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ags/cudawp/127075.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Behavior, Production and Competition

Author

Listed:
  • Just, David R.
  • Zilberman, David

Abstract

Previous studies have found underestimation of risk, or overconfidence, to be a key factor in entrepreneurship. We use a simple model of competitive equilibrium to show that an irrational under-estimation of risk provides a competitive advantage leading to a greater chance of survival under competitive pressures. Overconfidence leads to greater investment, production levels, average profit and greater variance of profits. Despite the greater variance of profits, if enough producers under-estimate their risk, they should collectively drive more rational decision-makers form the market. We illustrate a local equivalency between Kahneman and Tversky’s prospect theory model, and a subjective expected utility model with decision-makers display overconfidence. This model allows us to characterize risk attitudes through two primary effects: diminishing marginal utility of wealth (rational), and diminishing distance perception (behavioral). Diminishing distance perception is a simple measure of misperception of risk. Results from economic simulations suggest that diminishing distance perception may be a more important determinant of market behavior, and entrepreneurial success, than diminishing marginal utility of wealth.

Suggested Citation

  • Just, David R. & Zilberman, David, 2005. "Behavior, Production and Competition," Working Papers 127075, Cornell University, Department of Applied Economics and Management.
    • Handle: RePEc:ags:cudawp:127075
    DOI: 10.22004/ag.econ.127075
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://ageconsearch.umn.edu/record/127075/files/Cornell_Dyson_wp0506.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.22004/ag.econ.127075?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. Atanu Saha & C. Richard Shumway & Hovav Talpaz, 1994. "Joint Estimation of Risk Preference Structure and Technology Using Expo-Power Utility," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 76(2), pages 173-184.
    2. Just, David R. & Peterson, Hikaru Hanawa, 2003. "Expected Utility Calibration for Continuous Distributions," Working Papers 127170, Cornell University, Department of Applied Economics and Management.
    3. Baron, Robert A., 2000. "Counterfactual thinking and venture formation: The potential effects of thinking about "what might have been"," Journal of Business Venturing, Elsevier, vol. 15(1), pages 79-91, January.
    4. David R. Just & Hikaru Hanawa Peterson, 2003. "Diminishing Marginal Utility of Wealth and Calibration of Risk in Agriculture," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 85(5), pages 1234-1241.
    5. Green, Jerry, 1987. ""Making book against oneself," the Independence Axiom, and Nonlinear Utility Theory," Scholarly Articles 3203640, Harvard University Department of Economics.
    6. Blake, David, 1996. "Efficiency, Risk Aversion and Portfolio Insurance: An Analysis of Financial Asset Portfolios Held by Investors in the United Kingdom," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 106(438), pages 1175-1192, September.
    7. Chew, Soo Hong, 1983. "A Generalization of the Quasilinear Mean with Applications to the Measurement of Income Inequality and Decision Theory Resolving the Allais Paradox," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 51(4), pages 1065-1092, July.
    8. Forlani, David & Mullins, John W., 2000. "Perceived risks and choices in entrepreneurs' new venture decisions," Journal of Business Venturing, Elsevier, vol. 15(4), pages 305-322, July.
    9. Daniel Kahneman & Amos Tversky, 2013. "Prospect Theory: An Analysis of Decision Under Risk," World Scientific Book Chapters, in: Leonard C MacLean & William T Ziemba (ed.), HANDBOOK OF THE FUNDAMENTALS OF FINANCIAL DECISION MAKING Part I, chapter 6, pages 99-127, World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd..
    10. Hean Tat Keh & Maw Der Foo & Boon Chong Lim, 2002. "Opportunity Evaluation under Risky Conditions: The Cognitive Processes of Entrepreneurs," Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, , vol. 27(2), pages 125-148, April.
    11. Tversky, Amos & Kahneman, Daniel, 1992. "Advances in Prospect Theory: Cumulative Representation of Uncertainty," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 5(4), pages 297-323, October.
    12. John D. Hey & Chris Orme, 2018. "Investigating Generalizations Of Expected Utility Theory Using Experimental Data," World Scientific Book Chapters, in: Experiments in Economics Decision Making and Markets, chapter 3, pages 63-98, World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd..
    13. Viscusi, W Kip, 1989. "Prospective Reference Theory: Toward an Explanation of the Paradoxes," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 2(3), pages 235-263, September.
    14. Sandmo, Agnar, 1971. "On the Theory of the Competitive Firm under Price Uncertainty," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 61(1), pages 65-73, March.
    15. Jerry Green, 1987. ""Making Book Against Oneself," the Independence Axiom, and Nonlinear Utility Theory," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 102(4), pages 785-796.
    16. Palich, Leslie E. & Ray Bagby, D., 1995. "Using cognitive theory to explain entrepreneurial risk-taking: Challenging conventional wisdom," Journal of Business Venturing, Elsevier, vol. 10(6), pages 425-438, November.
    17. Cooper, Arnold C. & Woo, Carolyn Y. & Dunkelberg, William C., 1988. "Entrepreneurs' perceived chances for success," Journal of Business Venturing, Elsevier, vol. 3(2), pages 97-108.
    18. 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.
    19. Simon, Mark & Houghton, Susan M. & Aquino, Karl, 2000. "Cognitive biases, risk perception, and venture formation: How individuals decide to start companies," Journal of Business Venturing, Elsevier, vol. 15(2), pages 113-134, 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. Bellemare, Marc F. & Barrett, Christopher B. & Osterloh, Sharon M., 2005. "Household-Level Livestock Marketing Behavior Among Northern Kenyan and Southern Ethiopian Pastoralists," Working Papers 14749, Cornell University, Department of Applied Economics and Management.

    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. Dubard Barbosa, Saulo & Fayolle, Alain & Smith, Brett R., 2019. "Biased and overconfident, unbiased but going for it: How framing and anchoring affect the decision to start a new venture," Journal of Business Venturing, Elsevier, vol. 34(3), pages 528-557.
    2. Kraft, Priscilla S. & Günther, Christina & Kammerlander, Nadine H. & Lampe, Jan, 2022. "Overconfidence and entrepreneurship: A meta-analysis of different types of overconfidence in the entrepreneurial process," Journal of Business Venturing, Elsevier, vol. 37(4).
    3. Andreas Hack & Frauke Bieberstein & Nils D. Kraiczy, 2016. "Reference point formation and new venture creation," Small Business Economics, Springer, vol. 46(3), pages 447-465, March.
    4. Najoua Dali & Sana Harbi, 2016. "The Effect of Risk Perception and Cognitive Biases on the Evaluation of Opportunity in Family and Non-Family Entrepreneurs: The Case of Tunisian Entrepreneurs," Journal of Enterprising Culture (JEC), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 24(03), pages 281-312, September.
    5. Hernan E. Riquelme & Abdulaziz Alqallaf, 2020. "Anticipated emotions and their effects on risk and opportunity evaluations," Journal of International Entrepreneurship, Springer, vol. 18(3), pages 312-335, September.
    6. Saulo Dubard Barbosa & Alain Fayolle & Brett Smith, 2019. "Biased and overconfident, unbiased but going for it: How framing and anchoring affect the decision to start a new venture," Post-Print hal-01988083, HAL.
    7. Oliver Thomas, 2018. "Two decades of cognitive bias research in entrepreneurship: What do we know and where do we go from here?," Management Review Quarterly, Springer, vol. 68(2), pages 107-143, April.
    8. Jakusch, Sven Thorsten, 2017. "On the applicability of maximum likelihood methods: From experimental to financial data," SAFE Working Paper Series 148, Leibniz Institute for Financial Research SAFE, revised 2017.
    9. Kontek, Krzysztof, 2015. "Fanning-Out or Fanning-In? Continuous or Discontinuous? Estimating Indifference Curves Inside the Marschak-Machina Triangle using Certainty Equivalents," MPRA Paper 63965, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    10. Levesque, Moren & Schade, Christian, 2005. "Intuitive optimizing: experimental findings on time allocation decisions with newly formed ventures," Journal of Business Venturing, Elsevier, vol. 20(3), pages 313-342, May.
    11. Mingfeng Tang & Hao Huang & Grace Walsh & Maribel Guerrero, 2023. "The impact of entrepreneurial overconfidence on incubator effectiveness," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 48(1), pages 416-440, February.
    12. Cassar, Gavin & Craig, Justin, 2009. "An investigation of hindsight bias in nascent venture activity," Journal of Business Venturing, Elsevier, vol. 24(2), pages 149-164, March.
    13. Hönl, Andreas & Meissner, Philip & Wulf, Torsten, 2017. "Risk attribution theory: An exploratory conceptualization of individual choice under uncertainty," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 67(C), pages 20-27.
    14. Pindard-Lejarraga, Maud & Lejarraga, José, 2024. "Information source and entrepreneurial performance expectations: Experience-based versus description-based opportunity evaluations," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 172(C).
    15. Pavlo Blavatskyy, 2018. "A second-generation disappointment aversion theory of decision making under risk," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 84(1), pages 29-60, January.
    16. Simon, Mark & Shrader, Rodney C., 2012. "Entrepreneurial actions and optimistic overconfidence: The role of motivated reasoning in new product introductions," Journal of Business Venturing, Elsevier, vol. 27(3), pages 291-309.
    17. Blavatskyy, Pavlo R., 2012. "The Troika paradox," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 115(2), pages 236-239.
    18. Koellinger, Philipp & Minniti, Maria & Schade, Christian, 2007. ""I think I can, I think I can": Overconfidence and entrepreneurial behavior," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 28(4), pages 502-527, August.
    19. Daniel Fonseca Costa & Francisval Carvalho & Bruno César Moreira & José Willer Prado, 2017. "Bibliometric analysis on the association between behavioral finance and decision making with cognitive biases such as overconfidence, anchoring effect and confirmation bias," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 111(3), pages 1775-1799, June.
    20. Cucchiarini, Veronica & Scicchitano, Sergio & Viale, Riccardo, 2024. "The Entrepreneur's Cognitive and Behavioral Journey: Understanding Heuristics and Bias under Risk and Uncertainty," GLO Discussion Paper Series 1390, Global Labor Organization (GLO).

    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:ags:cudawp:127075. 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: AgEcon Search (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/dacorus.html .

    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.