IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ajk/ajkdps/355.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Sticky Models

Author

Listed:
  • Paul Grass

    (University of Bonn)

  • Philipp Schirmer

    (University of Bonn)

  • Malin Siemers

    (University of Bonn)

Abstract

People often form mental models based on incomplete information, revising them as new relevant data becomes available. In this paper, we experimentally investigate how individuals update their models when data on predictive variables are gradually revealed. We find that people's models tend to be `sticky,' as their final models remain strongly influenced by earlier models formed using a subset of variables. Guided by a simple framework highlighting the role of attention in shaping model revisions, we document that only participants who exert lower cognitive effort during the revising stage, relative to the initial model formation stage - as proxied by time spent - exhibit significant model stickiness. Additionally, subjects' final models are strongly predicted by their reasoning type - their self-described approach to extracting models from multidimensional data. While model stickiness varies across reasoning types, effort allocation across stages remains a strong predictor of stickiness even when accounting for reasoning.

Suggested Citation

  • Paul Grass & Philipp Schirmer & Malin Siemers, 2025. "Sticky Models," ECONtribute Discussion Papers Series 355, University of Bonn and University of Cologne, Germany.
    • Handle: RePEc:ajk:ajkdps:355
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.econtribute.de/RePEc/ajk/ajkdps/ECONtribute_355_2025.pdf
    File Function: First version, 2025
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Sandro Ambuehl & Heidi C. Thysen, 2024. "Choosing between Causal Interpretations: An Experimental Study," CESifo Working Paper Series 11103, CESifo.
    2. Harrison Hong & Jeremy C. Stein & Jialin Yu, 2007. "Simple Forecasts and Paradigm Shifts," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 62(3), pages 1207-1242, June.
    3. Andrew Caplin & Dániel CsabaQuantCo & John Leahy & Oded Nov, 2020. "Rational Inattention, Competitive Supply, and Psychometrics," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 135(3), pages 1681-1724.
    4. Wilcox, Nathaniel T, 1993. "Lottery Choice: Incentives, Complexity and Decision Time," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 103(421), pages 1397-1417, November.
    5. Chad Kendall & Ryan Oprea, 2024. "On the complexity of forming mental models," Quantitative Economics, Econometric Society, vol. 15(1), pages 175-211, January.
    6. Cuimin Ba, 2021. "Robust Misspecified Models and Paradigm Shifts," Papers 2106.12727, arXiv.org, revised Aug 2023.
    7. Matthew Rabin & Joel L. Schrag, 1999. "First Impressions Matter: A Model of Confirmatory Bias," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 114(1), pages 37-82.
    8. Ariel Rubinstein, 2016. "A Typology of Players: Between Instinctive and Contemplative," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 131(2), pages 859-890.
    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. Chiara Aina & Florian H. Schneider, 2025. "Weighting Competing Models," CEBI working paper series 25-04, University of Copenhagen. Department of Economics. The Center for Economic Behavior and Inequality (CEBI).
    2. Recalde, María P. & Riedl, Arno & Vesterlund, Lise, 2018. "Error-prone inference from response time: The case of intuitive generosity in public-good games," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 160(C), pages 132-147.
    3. Cary Frydman & Ian Krajbich, 2022. "Using Response Times to Infer Others’ Private Information: An Application to Information Cascades," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 68(4), pages 2970-2986, April.
    4. J. Aislinn Bohren & Daniel N. Hauser, 2023. "Behavioral Foundations of Model Misspecification," PIER Working Paper Archive 23-007, Penn Institute for Economic Research, Department of Economics, University of Pennsylvania.
    5. Timo Henckel & Gordon D. Menzies & Peter G. Moffatt & Daniel J. Zizzo, 2022. "Belief adjustment: a double hurdle model and experimental evidence," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 25(1), pages 26-67, February.
    6. Giampaolo Bonomi, 2023. "The Disagreement Dividend," Papers 2308.06607, arXiv.org, revised Jul 2024.
    7. repec:cup:judgdm:v:14:y:2019:i:4:p:381-394 is not listed on IDEAS
    8. Arkady Konovalov & Ian Krajbich, 2019. "Revealed strength of preference: Inference from response times," Judgment and Decision Making, Society for Judgment and Decision Making, vol. 14(4), pages 381-394, July.
    9. Clithero, John A., 2018. "Response times in economics: Looking through the lens of sequential sampling models," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 69(C), pages 61-86.
    10. Ba, Cuimin & Gindin, Alice, 2023. "A multi-agent model of misspecified learning with overconfidence," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 142(C), pages 315-338.
    11. J. Aislinn Bohren & Daniel N. Hauser, 2021. "Learning With Heterogeneous Misspecified Models: Characterization and Robustness," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 89(6), pages 3025-3077, November.
    12. Clithero, John A., 2018. "Improving out-of-sample predictions using response times and a model of the decision process," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 148(C), pages 344-375.
    13. Bobba, Matteo & Frisancho, Veronica, 2022. "Self-perceptions about academic achievement: Evidence from Mexico City," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 231(1), pages 58-73.
    14. Julio J. Rotemberg, 2010. "A Behavioral Model of Demandable Deposits and its Implications for Financial Regulation," NBER Working Papers 16620, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    15. Tesfatsion, Leigh, 2001. "Structure, behavior, and market power in an evolutionary labor market with adaptive search," Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control, Elsevier, vol. 25(3-4), pages 419-457, March.
    16. Philippe Jehiel & Jakub Steiner, 2020. "Selective Sampling with Information-Storage Constraints [On interim rationality, belief formation and learning in decision problems with bounded memory]," The Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 130(630), pages 1753-1781.
    17. David Danz & Dorothea Kübler & Lydia Mechtenberg & Julia Schmid, 2015. "On the Failure of Hindsight-Biased Principals to Delegate Optimally," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 61(8), pages 1938-1958, August.
    18. Ubeda, Paloma, 2014. "The consistency of fairness rules: An experimental study," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 41(C), pages 88-100.
    19. Umar, Tarik, 2022. "Complexity aversion when SeekingAlpha," Journal of Accounting and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 73(2).
    20. Guglielmo Zappalà, 2023. "Drought Exposure and Accuracy: Motivated Reasoning in Climate Change Beliefs," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 85(3), pages 649-672, August.
    21. Schnellenbach, Jan & Schubert, Christian, 2015. "Behavioral political economy: A survey," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 40(PB), pages 395-417.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Mental models; learning dynamics; attention; mental representation; bounded rationality;
    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

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    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:ajk:ajkdps:355. 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: ECONtribute Office (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.econtribute.de .

    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.