IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/sip/dpaper/06-042.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

A Test of Confidence Enhanced Performance: Evidence from US College Debaters

Author

Listed:
  • Jonathan Meer

    (Stanford University)

  • Edward Van Wesep

    (Stanford University)

Abstract

We test the theory put forth by Compte and Postlewaite (2004) that overconfidence might persist because it is welfare improving. They argue that because confidence enhances performance, some overconfidence is optimal in spite of its negative effect on decision-making. One implication of their model is that while an agent’s bias (first moment of prediction error) may not change as she gains experience in an activity, her predictive accuracy (second moment of prediction error) should improve. We test this implication by comparing predictions of success by university debaters with outcomes in debate rounds and evaluating how the first and second moments of their prediction errors change with experience. As predicted by the theory, we find that while debaters remain overconfident in spite of experience, they become more accurate in their predictions. These findings support the view that overconfidence may persist because it is welfare improving.

Suggested Citation

  • Jonathan Meer & Edward Van Wesep, 2007. "A Test of Confidence Enhanced Performance: Evidence from US College Debaters," Discussion Papers 06-042, Stanford Institute for Economic Policy Research.
  • Handle: RePEc:sip:dpaper:06-042
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www-siepr.stanford.edu/repec/sip/06-042.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Ulrike Malmendier & Geoffrey Tate, 2005. "CEO Overconfidence and Corporate Investment," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 60(6), pages 2661-2700, December.
    2. Cade Massey & Richard Thaler, 2005. "Overconfidence vs. Market Efficiency in the National Football League," NBER Working Papers 11270, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    3. Olivier Compte & Andrew Postlewaite, 2004. "Confidence-Enhanced Performance," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 94(5), pages 1536-1557, December.
    4. Muriel Niederle & Lise Vesterlund, 2007. "Do Women Shy Away From Competition? Do Men Compete Too Much?," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 122(3), pages 1067-1101.
    5. Malmendier, Ulrike & Tate, Geoffrey, 2008. "Who makes acquisitions? CEO overconfidence and the market's reaction," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 89(1), pages 20-43, July.
    6. Luís Santos-Pinto & Joel Sobel, 2005. "A Model of Positive Self-Image in Subjective Assessments," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 95(5), pages 1386-1402, December.
    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. B. Douglas Bernheim & Jonathan Meer, 2007. "How Much do Real Estate Brokers Add? A Case Study," Discussion Papers 06-041, Stanford Institute for Economic Policy Research.

    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. Bobba, Matteo & Frisancho, Veronica, 2022. "Self-perceptions about academic achievement: Evidence from Mexico City," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 231(1), pages 58-73.
    2. Markus M. Möbius & Muriel Niederle & Paul Niehaus & Tanya S. Rosenblat, 2022. "Managing Self-Confidence: Theory and Experimental Evidence," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 68(11), pages 7793-7817, November.
    3. Mayraz, Guy, 2011. "Wishful thinking," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 121942, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    4. Carmen Thoma, 2016. "Under- versus overconfidence: an experiment on how others perceive a biased self-assessment," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 19(1), pages 218-239, March.
    5. Prokudina, Elena & Renneboog, Luc & Tobler, Philippe, 2015. "Does Confidence Predict Out-of-Domain Effort?," Other publications TiSEM 2a1830fc-471f-45a3-b9b0-a, Tilburg University, School of Economics and Management.
    6. Jonathan F Schulz & Christian Thöni, 2016. "Overconfidence and Career Choice," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 11(1), pages 1-8, January.
    7. Berger, Allen N. & Kick, Thomas & Schaeck, Klaus, 2014. "Executive board composition and bank risk taking," Journal of Corporate Finance, Elsevier, vol. 28(C), pages 48-65.
    8. Banerjee, Ritwik & Gupta, Nabanita Datta & Villeval, Marie Claire, 2020. "Feedback spillovers across tasks, self-confidence and competitiveness," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 123(C), pages 127-170.
    9. King-King Li, 2022. "Memory Recall Bias of Overconfident and Underconfident Individuals after Feedback," Post-Print hal-03841235, HAL.
    10. Guy Mayraz, 2011. "Wishful Thinking," CEP Discussion Papers dp1092, Centre for Economic Performance, LSE.
    11. Zachary Breig & Matthew Gibson & Jeffrey Shrader, 2019. "Why Do We Procrastinate? Present Bias and Optimism," Department of Economics Working Papers 2019-15, Department of Economics, Williams College.
    12. Reuben, Ernesto & Rey-Biel, Pedro & Sapienza, Paola & Zingales, Luigi, 2012. "The emergence of male leadership in competitive environments," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 83(1), pages 111-117.
    13. Zahra Murad & Martin Sefton & Chris Starmer, 2016. "How do risk attitudes affect measured confidence?," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 52(1), pages 21-46, February.
    14. Christopher Roth & Sonja Settele & Johannes Wohlfart, 2022. "Risk Exposure and Acquisition of Macroeconomic Information," American Economic Review: Insights, American Economic Association, vol. 4(1), pages 34-53, March.
    15. Peter Schwardmann & Joël van der Weele, 2016. "Deception and Self-Deception," Tinbergen Institute Discussion Papers 16-012/I, Tinbergen Institute.
    16. Sanjukta Brahma & Agyenim Boateng & Sardar Ahmad, 2023. "Board overconfidence and M&A performance: evidence from the UK," Review of Quantitative Finance and Accounting, Springer, vol. 60(4), pages 1363-1391, May.
    17. Frye, Melissa B. & Pham, Duong T., 2018. "CEO gender and corporate board structures," The Quarterly Review of Economics and Finance, Elsevier, vol. 69(C), pages 110-124.
    18. Danz, David, 2020. "Never underestimate your opponent: Hindsight bias causes overplacement and overentry into competition," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 124(C), pages 588-603.
    19. R. Øystein Strøm & Bert D’Espallier & Roy Mersland, 2023. "Female Leaders and Financial Inclusion: Evidence from Microfinance Institutions," Review of Corporate Finance, now publishers, vol. 3(1-2), pages 69-97, May.
    20. Schrand, Catherine M. & Zechman, Sarah L.C., 2012. "Executive overconfidence and the slippery slope to financial misreporting," Journal of Accounting and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 53(1), pages 311-329.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    overconfidence;

    JEL classification:

    • D83 - Microeconomics - - Information, Knowledge, and Uncertainty - - - Search; Learning; Information and Knowledge; Communication; Belief; Unawareness
    • D84 - Microeconomics - - Information, Knowledge, and Uncertainty - - - Expectations; Speculations

    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:sip:dpaper:06-042. 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: Anne Shor (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/cestaus.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.