IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/nbr/nberwo/28922.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

The Dynamics of Inattention in the (Baseball) Field

Author

Listed:
  • James E. Archsmith
  • Anthony Heyes
  • Matthew J. Neidell
  • Bhaven N. Sampat

Abstract

Recent theoretical and empirical work characterizes attention as a limited resource that decision-makers strategically allocate. There has been less research on the dynamic interdependence of attention: how paying attention now may affect performance later. In this paper, we exploit high-frequency data on decision-making by Major League Baseball umpires to examine this. We find that umpires not only apply greater effort to higher-stakes decisions, but also that effort applied to earlier decisions increases errors later. These findings are consistent with the umpire having a depletable ‘budget’ of attention. There is no such dynamic interdependence after breaks during the game (at the end of each inning) suggesting that even short rest periods can replenish attention budgets. We also find that an expectation of higher stakes future decisions leads to reduced attention to current decisions, consistent with forward-looking behavior by umpires aware of attention scarcity.

Suggested Citation

  • James E. Archsmith & Anthony Heyes & Matthew J. Neidell & Bhaven N. Sampat, 2021. "The Dynamics of Inattention in the (Baseball) Field," NBER Working Papers 28922, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
  • Handle: RePEc:nbr:nberwo:28922
    Note: EH LS PE
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.nber.org/papers/w28922.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Daron Acemoglu & Pascual Restrepo, 2020. "The wrong kind of AI? Artificial intelligence and the future of labour demand," Cambridge Journal of Regions, Economy and Society, Cambridge Political Economy Society, vol. 13(1), pages 25-35.
    2. Hirshleifer, David & Levi, Yaron & Lourie, Ben & Teoh, Siew Hong, 2019. "Decision fatigue and heuristic analyst forecasts," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 133(1), pages 83-98.
    3. Christopher A. Parsons & Johan Sulaeman & Michael C. Yates & Daniel S. Hamermesh, 2011. "Strike Three: Discrimination, Incentives, and Evaluation," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 101(4), pages 1410-1435, June.
    4. Xavier Gabaix & David Laibson & Guillermo Moloche & Stephen Weinberg, 2006. "Costly Information Acquisition: Experimental Analysis of a Boundedly Rational Model," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 96(4), pages 1043-1068, September.
    5. Vojtěch Bartoš & Michal Bauer & Julie Chytilová & Filip Matějka, 2016. "Attention Discrimination: Theory and Field Experiments with Monitoring Information Acquisition," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 106(6), pages 1437-1475, June.
    6. Jerry W. Kim & Brayden G King, 2014. "Seeing Stars: Matthew Effects and Status Bias in Major League Baseball Umpiring," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 60(11), pages 2619-2644, November.
    7. Chen, Daniel L. & Moskowitz, Tobias J. & Shue, Kelly, 2016. "Decision-Making Under the Gambler’s Fallacy: Evidence From Asylum Courts, Loan Officers, and Baseball Umpires," IAST Working Papers 16-43, Institute for Advanced Study in Toulouse (IAST).
    8. Raj Chetty & Adam Looney & Kory Kroft, 2009. "Salience and Taxation: Theory and Evidence," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 99(4), pages 1145-1177, September.
    9. Ned Augenblick & Scott Nicholson, 2016. "Ballot Position, Choice Fatigue, and Voter Behaviour," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 83(2), pages 460-480.
    10. Josef Falkinger, 2008. "Limited Attention as a Scarce Resource in Information-Rich Economies," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 118(532), pages 1596-1620, October.
    11. Sims, Christopher A., 2003. "Implications of rational inattention," Journal of Monetary Economics, Elsevier, vol. 50(3), pages 665-690, April.
    12. Daniel L. Chen & Tobias J. Moskowitz & Kelly Shue, 2016. "Decision Making Under the Gambler’s Fallacy: Evidence from Asylum Judges, Loan Officers, and Baseball Umpires," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 131(3), pages 1181-1242.
    13. Hunt Allcott & Nathan Wozny, 2014. "Gasoline Prices, Fuel Economy, and the Energy Paradox," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 96(5), pages 779-795, December.
    14. James Archsmith & Anthony Heyes & Soodeh Saberian, 2018. "Air Quality and Error Quantity: Pollution and Performance in a High-Skilled, Quality-Focused Occupation," Journal of the Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, University of Chicago Press, vol. 5(4), pages 827-863.
    15. Jonathan Levav & Mark Heitmann & Andreas Herrmann & Sheena S. Iyengar, 2010. "Order in Product Customization Decisions: Evidence from Field Experiments," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 118(2), pages 274-299, April.
    16. Ehrenberg, Ronald G & Bognanno, Michael L, 1990. "Do Tournaments Have Incentive Effects?," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 98(6), pages 1307-1324, December.
    17. Dragone, Davide, 2009. "I am getting tired: Effort and fatigue in intertemporal decision-making," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 30(4), pages 552-562, August.
    18. Sergio Correia, 2014. "REGHDFE: Stata module to perform linear or instrumental-variable regression absorbing any number of high-dimensional fixed effects," Statistical Software Components S457874, Boston College Department of Economics, revised 21 Aug 2023.
    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. Koch, Alexander K. & Monster, Dan & Nafziger, Julia, 2023. "Nudging in Complex Environments," IZA Discussion Papers 16137, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    2. Mike Hsu, 2024. "Umpire Home Bias in Major League Baseball," Journal of Sports Economics, , vol. 25(4), pages 423-442, May.
    3. Germán Reyes, 2023. "Cognitive Endurance, Talent Selection, and the Labor Market Returns to Human Capital," CRC TR 224 Discussion Paper Series crctr224_2023_490, University of Bonn and University of Mannheim, Germany.
    4. Germ'an Reyes, 2023. "Cognitive Endurance, Talent Selection, and the Labor Market Returns to Human Capital," Papers 2301.02575, arXiv.org.
    5. Reio Tanji, 2022. "Pitch Call Discrimination in Major League Baseball: The Effect on the Observed Performance and the Salaries," Discussion Papers in Economics and Business 22-02, Osaka University, Graduate School of Economics.
    6. Mocan, Naci & Osborne-Christenson, Eric, 2022. "In-Group Favoritism and Peer Effects in Wrongful Acquittals: NBA Referees as Judges," IZA Discussion Papers 15195, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).

    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. Artiga González, Tanja & Calluzzo, Paul & Granic, Georg D., 2023. "Ballot order effects in independent director elections," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Finance, Elsevier, vol. 39(C).
    2. Emil Persson & Kinga Barrafrem & Andreas Meunier & Gustav Tinghög, 2019. "The effect of decision fatigue on surgeons' clinical decision making," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 28(10), pages 1194-1203, October.
    3. Jiao, Yawen, 2024. "Managing decision fatigue: Evidence from analysts’ earnings forecasts," Journal of Accounting and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 77(1).
    4. Dewan, Ambuj & Neligh, Nathaniel, 2020. "Estimating information cost functions in models of rational inattention," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 187(C).
    5. Erin T. Bronchetti & Judd B. Kessler & Ellen B. Magenheim & Dmitry Taubinsky & Eric Zwick, 2023. "Is Attention Produced Optimally? Theory and Evidence From Experiments With Bandwidth Enhancements," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 91(2), pages 669-707, March.
    6. Dominik Naeher, 2022. "Technology Adoption Under Costly Information Processing," International Economic Review, Department of Economics, University of Pennsylvania and Osaka University Institute of Social and Economic Research Association, vol. 63(2), pages 699-753, May.
    7. Xavier Gabaix, 2017. "Behavioral Inattention," NBER Working Papers 24096, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    8. Katja Bergonzoli & Laurent Bieri & Dominic Rohner & Christian Zehnder, 2024. "Hungry Professors? Decision Biases Are Less Widespread than Previously Thought," Papers 2408.06048, arXiv.org.
    9. Mills, Brian M. & Salaga, Steven, 2018. "A natural experiment for efficient markets: Information quality and influential agents," Journal of Financial Markets, Elsevier, vol. 40(C), pages 23-39.
    10. Reio Tanji, 2022. "Pitch Call Discrimination in Major League Baseball: The Effect on the Observed Performance and the Salaries," Discussion Papers in Economics and Business 22-02, Osaka University, Graduate School of Economics.
    11. Stefano DellaVigna, 2009. "Psychology and Economics: Evidence from the Field," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 47(2), pages 315-372, June.
    12. Bartosz Maćkowiak & Filip Matějka & Mirko Wiederholt, 2023. "Rational Inattention: A Review," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 61(1), pages 226-273, March.
    13. repec:jdm:journl:v:17:y:2022:i:6:p:1176-1207 is not listed on IDEAS
    14. repec:cup:judgdm:v:17:y:2022:i:6:p:1176-1207 is not listed on IDEAS
    15. Emmanuel Farhi & Xavier Gabaix, 2020. "Optimal Taxation with Behavioral Agents," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 110(1), pages 298-336, January.
    16. Agnès Festré & Pierre Garrouste, 2015. "The ‘Economics of Attention’: A History of Economic Thought Perspective," Post-Print halshs-02314240, HAL.
    17. Hartmut Egger & Josef Falkinger, 2016. "Limited Consumer Attention in International Trade," Review of International Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 24(5), pages 1096-1128, November.
    18. Xavier Gabaix, 2014. "A Sparsity-Based Model of Bounded Rationality," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 129(4), pages 1661-1710.
    19. Yusufcan Masatlioglu & Daisuke Nakajima & Erkut Y. Ozbay, 2012. "Revealed Attention," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 102(5), pages 2183-2205, August.
    20. Agnès Festré & Pierre Garrouste, 2012. "The ‘Economics of Attention’: A New Avenue of Research in Cognitive Economics," GREDEG Working Papers 2012-12, Groupe de REcherche en Droit, Economie, Gestion (GREDEG CNRS), Université Côte d'Azur, France.
    21. Deshpande Sameer K. & Wyner Abraham, 2017. "A hierarchical Bayesian model of pitch framing," Journal of Quantitative Analysis in Sports, De Gruyter, vol. 13(3), pages 95-112, September.
    22. Raj Chetty & Adam Looney & Kory Kroft, 2009. "Salience and Taxation: Theory and Evidence," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 99(4), pages 1145-1177, September.

    More about this item

    JEL classification:

    • D83 - Microeconomics - - Information, Knowledge, and Uncertainty - - - Search; Learning; Information and Knowledge; Communication; Belief; Unawareness
    • D84 - Microeconomics - - Information, Knowledge, and Uncertainty - - - Expectations; Speculations
    • 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:nbr:nberwo:28922. 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: the person in charge (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/nberrus.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.