IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/bge/wpaper/426.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Econometrics and Decision Making: Effects of Presentation Mode

Author

Listed:
  • Robin Hogarth
  • Emre Soyer

Abstract

Much of empirical economics involves regression analysis. However, does the presentation of results affect economists' ability to make inferences for decision making purposes? In a survey, 257 academic economists were asked to make probabilistic inferences on the basis of the outputs of a regression analysis presented in a standard format. Questions concerned the distribution of the dependent variable conditional on known values of the independent variable. However, many respondents underestimated uncertainty by failing to take into account the standard deviation of the estimated residuals. The addition of graphs did not substantially improve inferences. On the other hand, when only graphs were provided (i.e., with no statistics), respondents were substantially more accurate. We discuss implications for improving practice in reporting results of regression analyses.

Suggested Citation

  • Robin Hogarth & Emre Soyer, 2010. "Econometrics and Decision Making: Effects of Presentation Mode," Working Papers 426, Barcelona School of Economics.
    • Handle: RePEc:bge:wpaper:426
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.barcelonagse.eu/sites/default/files/working_paper_pdfs/426.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Deirdre N. McCloskey & Stephen T. Ziliak, 1996. "The Standard Error of Regressions," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 34(1), pages 97-114, March.
    2. Camerer, Colin F & Hogarth, Robin M, 1999. "The Effects of Financial Incentives in Experiments: A Review and Capital-Labor-Production Framework," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 19(1-3), pages 7-42, December.
    3. Lawrence, Michael & Makridakis, Spyros, 1989. "Factors affecting judgmental forecasts and confidence intervals," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 43(2), pages 172-187, April.
    4. 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..
    5. Simon, Herbert A, 1978. "Rationality as Process and as Product of Thought," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 68(2), pages 1-16, May.
    6. Baltagi, Badi H., 2007. "Worldwide Econometrics Rankings: 1989–2005," Econometric Theory, Cambridge University Press, vol. 23(5), pages 952-1012, October.
    7. Carhart, Mark M, 1997. "On Persistence in Mutual Fund Performance," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 52(1), pages 57-82, March.
    8. Tversky, Amos & Kahneman, Daniel, 1986. "Rational Choice and the Framing of Decisions," The Journal of Business, University of Chicago Press, vol. 59(4), pages 251-278, October.
    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. Robin Hogarth & Emre Soyer, 2010. "Experiencing simulated outcomes," Economics Working Papers 1224, Department of Economics and Business, Universitat Pompeu Fabra.
    2. Arribas, Iván & Comeig, Irene & Urbano, Amparo & Vila, José, 2014. "Statistical formats to optimize evidence-based decision making: A behavioral approach," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 67(5), pages 790-794.

    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. Soyer, Emre & Hogarth, Robin M., 2012. "The illusion of predictability: How regression statistics mislead experts," International Journal of Forecasting, Elsevier, vol. 28(3), pages 695-711.
    2. Mercè Roca & Robin Hogarth & A. Maule, 2006. "Ambiguity seeking as a result of the status quo bias," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 32(3), pages 175-194, May.
    3. Thomas Kourouxous & Thomas Bauer, 2019. "Violations of dominance in decision-making," Business Research, Springer;German Academic Association for Business Research, vol. 12(1), pages 209-239, April.
    4. Bogliacino, Francesco & Codagnone, Cristiano, 2021. "Microfoundations, behaviour, and evolution: Evidence from experiments," Structural Change and Economic Dynamics, Elsevier, vol. 56(C), pages 372-385.
    5. Altman, Morris, 2014. "Insights from behavioral economics on how labor markets work," Working Paper Series 3466, Victoria University of Wellington, School of Economics and Finance.
    6. Rhodes, Charles, 2012. "A Dynamic Model of Failure to Maximize Utility in the Chronic Consumer Choice to Consume Foods High in Added Sugars," 2012 Annual Meeting, August 12-14, 2012, Seattle, Washington 124693, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    7. Etchart-Vincent, Nathalie, 2007. "Expérimentation de laboratoire et économie : contre quelques idées reçues et faux problèmes," L'Actualité Economique, Société Canadienne de Science Economique, vol. 83(1), pages 91-116, mars.
    8. Stefan Schiller, 2017. "The Quest for Rationality: Chief Financial Officers’ and Accounting Master’s Students’ Perception of Economic Rationality," SAGE Open, , vol. 7(2), pages 21582440177, April.
    9. Ulrich Schmidt & Christian Seidl, 2014. "Reconsidering the common ratio effect: the roles of compound independence, reduction, and coalescing," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 77(3), pages 323-339, October.
    10. Dharshing, Samdruk & Hille, Stefanie Lena & Wüstenhagen, Rolf, 2017. "The Influence of Political Orientation on the Strength and Temporal Persistence of Policy Framing Effects," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 142(C), pages 295-305.
    11. Newark, Daniel A., 2014. "Indecision and the construction of self," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 125(2), pages 162-174.
    12. Shoham Choshen‐Hillel & Ehud Guttel & Alon Harel, 2022. "Framing negligence," Journal of Empirical Legal Studies, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 19(2), pages 296-339, June.
    13. David Dequech, 2008. "Varieties of uncertainty: a survey of the economic literature," Anais do XXXVI Encontro Nacional de Economia [Proceedings of the 36th Brazilian Economics Meeting] 200807211223070, ANPEC - Associação Nacional dos Centros de Pós-Graduação em Economia [Brazilian Association of Graduate Programs in Economics].
    14. Pietro Guarnieri & Tommaso Luzzati, 2018. "Riflessioni intorno al tema della razionalità in economia," Discussion Papers 2018/237, Dipartimento di Economia e Management (DEM), University of Pisa, Pisa, Italy.
    15. Martin Gold, 2010. "Fiduciary Finance," Books, Edward Elgar Publishing, number 13813.
    16. Marc Scholten & Daniel Read & Neil Stewart, 2019. "The framing of nothing and the psychology of choice," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 59(2), pages 125-149, October.
    17. Erixon, Lennart, 1998. "The Theory of Transformation Pressure - a New Perspective on Growth and Economic Policy," Research Papers in Economics 1998:3, Stockholm University, Department of Economics.
    18. Cunningham, Thomas, 2013. "Biases and Implicit Knowledge," MPRA Paper 50292, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    19. Perera, H. Niles & Hurley, Jason & Fahimnia, Behnam & Reisi, Mohsen, 2019. "The human factor in supply chain forecasting: A systematic review," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 274(2), pages 574-600.
    20. Rothengatter, Marloes, 2016. "Insights in cognitive patterns : Essays on heuristics and identification," Other publications TiSEM 5f812a9d-8968-48b8-8d1b-0, Tilburg University, School of Economics and Management.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Regression analysis; Presentation formats; Probabilistic predictions; Graphs;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • C01 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - General - - - Econometrics
    • C20 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Single Equation Models; Single Variables - - - General
    • C53 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Econometric Modeling - - - Forecasting and Prediction Models; Simulation Methods
    • Y10 - Miscellaneous Categories - - Data: Tables and Charts - - - Data: Tables and Charts

    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:bge:wpaper:426. 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: Bruno Guallar (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/bargses.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.