IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/bno/worpap/2010_04.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Why do people give less weight to advice the further it is from their initial opinion?

Author

Listed:
  • Francesco Ravazzolo

    (Norges Bank (Central Bank of Norway))

  • Øistein Røisland

    (Norges Bank (Central Bank of Norway))

Abstract

Experimental studies on decision making based on advice received from others find that the weight put on the advice is negatively related to the distance between the advice and the decisionmaker's initial opinion. In this paper, we show that the distance effect can follow from rational signal extraction when the decisionmaker has imperfect knowledge about the advisor's competence. What drives the result is the assumption that the decisionmaker is better informed about her own competence than about the advisor's competence.

Suggested Citation

  • Francesco Ravazzolo & Øistein Røisland, 2010. "Why do people give less weight to advice the further it is from their initial opinion?," Working Paper 2010/04, Norges Bank.
    • Handle: RePEc:bno:worpap:2010_04
    Note: First version:
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.norges-bank.no/en/news-events/news-publications/Papers/Working-Papers/2010/WP-201004/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Distance effect; Policy decision making; Signal extraction; Uncertainty;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • C11 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Econometric and Statistical Methods and Methodology: General - - - Bayesian Analysis: General
    • D78 - Microeconomics - - Analysis of Collective Decision-Making - - - Positive Analysis of Policy Formulation and Implementation
    • D82 - Microeconomics - - Information, Knowledge, and Uncertainty - - - Asymmetric and Private Information; Mechanism Design
    • D83 - Microeconomics - - Information, Knowledge, and Uncertainty - - - Search; Learning; Information and Knowledge; Communication; Belief; Unawareness

    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:bno:worpap:2010_04. 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: the person in charge (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/nbgovno.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.