IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/osf/osfxxx/vfqy2_v1.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Information Theory and Biased Beliefs

Author

Listed:
  • Little, Andrew T.

Abstract

Beliefs can be incorrect or biased in many ways. I propose a unifying microfoundation for many well-documented biases using ideas from information theory. The common theme is that subjective beliefs are the solution to an optimization problem where one goal is accuracy, formalized by minimizing Kullback-Leibler divergence from the objective belief. Correct beliefs are a special case where accuracy is the only goal. Other goals or constraints produce biases such as motivated beliefs, partition dependence, anchoring, overconfidence, confirmation bias, base-rate neglect, and conservatism.

Suggested Citation

  • Little, Andrew T., 2022. "Information Theory and Biased Beliefs," OSF Preprints vfqy2_v1, Center for Open Science.
  • Handle: RePEc:osf:osfxxx:vfqy2_v1
    DOI: 10.31219/osf.io/vfqy2_v1
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://osf.io/download/6384cbfa723a1115ae18c87a/
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.31219/osf.io/vfqy2_v1?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. Ignacio Esponda & Demian Pouzo, 2016. "Berk–Nash Equilibrium: A Framework for Modeling Agents With Misspecified Models," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 84, pages 1093-1130, May.
    2. Benjamin Enke & Thomas Graeber, 2019. "Cognitive Uncertainty," NBER Working Papers 26518, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    3. Drew Fudenberg, 2006. "Advancing Beyond Advances in Behavioral Economics," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 44(3), pages 694-711, September.
    4. Andrew Caplin & Mark Dean & John Leahy, 2022. "Rationally Inattentive Behavior: Characterizing and Generalizing Shannon Entropy," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 130(6), pages 1676-1715.
    5. Bracha, Anat & Brown, Donald J., 2012. "Affective decision making: A theory of optimism bias," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 75(1), pages 67-80.
    6. 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.
    7. Leeat Yariv, 2002. "I'll See It When I Believe It - A Simple Model of Cognitive Consistency," Cowles Foundation Discussion Papers 1352, Cowles Foundation for Research in Economics, Yale University.
    8. Filip Matêjka & Alisdair McKay, 2015. "Rational Inattention to Discrete Choices: A New Foundation for the Multinomial Logit Model," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 105(1), pages 272-298, January.
    9. Daniel J. Benjamin & Don A. Moore & Matthew Rabin, 2017. "Biased Beliefs About Random Samples: Evidence from Two Integrated Experiments," NBER Working Papers 23927, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    10. Victor Stango & Jonathan Zinman, 2023. "We Are All Behavioural, More, or Less: A Taxonomy of Consumer Decision-Making," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 90(3), pages 1470-1498.
    11. Peter Schwardmann & Egon Tripodi & Joël J. van der Weele, 2022. "Self-Persuasion: Evidence from Field Experiments at International Debating Competitions," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 112(4), pages 1118-1146, April.
    12. Prior, Markus & Sood, Gaurav & Khanna, Kabir, 2015. "You Cannot be Serious: The Impact of Accuracy Incentives on Partisan Bias in Reports of Economic Perceptions," Quarterly Journal of Political Science, now publishers, vol. 10(4), pages 489-518, December.
    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. Little, Andrew T., 2022. "Information Theory and Biased Beliefs," OSF Preprints vfqy2, Center for Open Science.
    2. Ingar Haaland & Christopher Roth & Johannes Wohlfart, 2023. "Designing Information Provision Experiments," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 61(1), pages 3-40, March.
    3. 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.
    4. Xavier Gabaix, 2017. "Behavioral Inattention," NBER Working Papers 24096, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    5. Andrew Caplin & David J. Deming & Søren Leth-Petersen & Ben Weidmann, 2023. "Economic Decision-Making Skill Predicts Income in Two Countries," NBER Working Papers 31674, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    6. Matějka, Filip & Mackowiak, Bartosz & Wiederholt, Mirko, 2018. "Survey: Rational Inattention, a Disciplined Behavioral Model," CEPR Discussion Papers 13243, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    7. 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.
    8. Atahan Afsar; José Elías Gallegos; Richard Jaimes; Edgar Silgado Gómez & José Elías Gallegos & Richard Jaimes & Edgar Silgado Gómez, 2020. "Reconciling Empirics and Theory: The Behavioral Hybrid New Keynesian Model," Vniversitas Económica, Universidad Javeriana - Bogotá, vol. 0(0), pages 1-41, December.
    9. Kubler, Felix & Scheidegger, Simon, 2023. "Uniformly self-justified equilibria," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 212(C).
    10. Vedolin, Andrea & Molavi, Pooya & Tahbaz-Salehi, Alireza, 2021. "Model Complexity, Expectations, and Asset Prices," CEPR Discussion Papers 15717, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    11. Tommaso Denti & Doron Ravid, 2023. "Robust Predictions in Games with Rational Inattention," Papers 2306.09964, arXiv.org.
    12. Figueroa, Nicolás & Guadalupi, Carla, 2021. "Testing the sender: When signaling is not enough," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 197(C).
    13. Philippe Jehiel, 2022. "Analogy-Based Expectation Equilibrium and Related Concepts:Theory, Applications, and Beyond," PSE Working Papers halshs-03735680, HAL.
    14. Hébert, Benjamin & Woodford, Michael, 2023. "Rational inattention when decisions take time," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 208(C).
    15. Katharina Momsen & Sebastian O. Schneider, 2022. "Motivated Reasoning, Information Avoidance, and Default Bias," Discussion Paper Series of the Max Planck Institute for Research on Collective Goods 2022_03, Max Planck Institute for Research on Collective Goods.
    16. Matysková, Ludmila & Rogers, Brian & Steiner, Jakub & Sun, Keh-Kuan, 2020. "Habits as adaptations: An experimental study," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 122(C), pages 391-406.
    17. Jordi Mondria & Xavier Vives & Liyan Yang, 2022. "Costly Interpretation of Asset Prices," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 68(1), pages 52-74, January.
    18. Andrew Caplin & John V. Leahy, 2019. "Wishful Thinking," NBER Working Papers 25707, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    19. David Walker-Jones, 2019. "Rational Inattention and Perceptual Distance," Papers 1909.00888, arXiv.org, revised Dec 2019.
    20. Roc Armenter & Michèle Müller-Itten & Zachary Strangebye, 2021. "Geometric Methods for Finite Rational Inattention," Working Papers 21-30, Federal Reserve Bank of Philadelphia.

    More about this item

    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:osf:osfxxx:vfqy2_v1. 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: OSF (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://osf.io/preprints/ .

    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.