Overconfidence in Tournaments: Evidence from the Field
by Young Joon Park, Luís Santos-Pinto
ARTICLE | Theory and Decision | Vol. 69, 2010
Abstract
This paper uses a field survey to investigate the quality of individuals’ beliefs of relative performance in tournaments. We consider two field settings, poker and chess, which differ in the degree to which luck is a factor and also in the information that players have about the ability of the competition. We find that poker players’ forecasts of relative performance are random guesses with an overestimation bias. Chess players also overestimate their relative performance but make informed guesses. We find support for the “unskilled and unaware hypothesis” in chess: highskilled chess players make better forecasts than low-skilled chess players. Finally, we find that chess players’ forecasts of relative performance are not efficient.
Keywords: Tournaments, Rationality, Field experiment
Keywords: Tournaments, Rationality, Field experiment
Popular Articles
-
International Student Profile: Kevin Kurnia
Oct 12 2017
-
PHBS Opening a Campus in UK: Se...
Feb 22 2017
-
PHBSers: Wishing You a Better Year Ahead!
Dec 30 2016
Latest News
-
Yeujun Yoon: Rise to Challenges and Find the True Calling
Time:Feb 23 2018
-
PHBS Exchange Students: Heavier Luggage, Fuller Hearts
Time:Jan 23 2018
-
PHBS 2018 Winter Camp: When Pyth...
Time:Jan 23 2018
Campus Events