IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/cup/judgdm/v7y2012i6p761-767_9.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Debiasing egocentrism and optimism biases in repeated competitions

Author

Listed:
  • Rose, Jason P.
  • Windschitl, Paul D.
  • Smith, Andrew R.

Abstract

When judging their likelihood of success in competitive tasks, people tend to be overoptimistic for easy tasks and overpessimistic for hard tasks (the shared circumstance effect; SCE). Previous research has shown that feedback and experience from repeated-play competitions has a limited impact on SCEs. However, in this paper, we suggest that competitive situations, in which the shared difficulty or easiness of the task is more transparent, will be more amenable to debiasing via repeated play. Pairs of participants competed in, made predictions about, and received feedback on, multiple rounds of a throwing task involving both easy- and hard-to-aim objects. Participants initially showed robust SCEs, but they also showed a significant reduction in bias after only one round of feedback. These and other results support a more positive view (than suggested from past research) on the potential for SCEs to be debiased through outcome feedback.

Suggested Citation

  • Rose, Jason P. & Windschitl, Paul D. & Smith, Andrew R., 2012. "Debiasing egocentrism and optimism biases in repeated competitions," Judgment and Decision Making, Cambridge University Press, vol. 7(6), pages 761-767, November.
    • Handle: RePEc:cup:judgdm:v:7:y:2012:i:6:p:761-767_9
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.cambridge.org/core/product/identifier/S1930297500003314/type/journal_article
    File Function: link to article abstract page
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    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:cup:judgdm:v:7:y:2012:i:6:p:761-767_9. 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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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: Kirk Stebbing (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.cambridge.org/jdm .

    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.