Applying Quadratic Scoring Rule transparently in multiple choice settings: A note
AbstractThe quadratic scoring rule (QSR) is often used to guarantee an incentive compatible elicitation of subjective probabilities over events. Experimentalists have regularly not been able to ensure that subjects fully comprehend the consequences of their actions on payoffs given the rules of the games. In this note, we present a procedure that allows the transparent use of the QSR even in multiple-choice scenarios. For that purpose, two methodological means are applied: an alternative representation of the score and a short learning period to familiarize subjects with the payoff mechanism. The results suggest that both means were necessary and successful in facilitating subjects’ understanding of the rule.
Download InfoIf you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.
Bibliographic InfoPaper provided by Department of Economic Theory and Economic History of the University of Granada. in its series ThE Papers with number 10/01.
Length: 30 pages
Date of creation: 10 Feb 2010
Date of revision:
quadratic scoring rule; belief elicitation; saliency; experiment;
Other versions of this item:
- Florian Artinger & Filippos Exadaktylos & Hannes Koppel & Lauri Sääksvuori, 2010. "Applying Quadratic Scoring Rule transparently in multiple choice settings: A note," Jena Economic Research Papers 2010-021, Friedrich-Schiller-University Jena, Max-Planck-Institute of Economics.
- D84 - Microeconomics - - Information, Knowledge, and Uncertainty - - - Expectations; Speculations
- C90 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Design of Experiments - - - General
This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:
- NEP-ALL-2010-02-27 (All new papers)
- NEP-CBE-2010-02-27 (Cognitive & Behavioural Economics)
- NEP-EXP-2010-02-27 (Experimental Economics)
Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:
- Neugebauer, Tibor & Perote, Javier & Schmidt, Ulrich & Loos, Malte, 2009.
"Selfish-biased conditional cooperation: On the decline of contributions in repeated public goods experiments,"
Journal of Economic Psychology,
Elsevier, vol. 30(1), pages 52-60, February.
- Tibor Neugebauer & Javier Perote & Ulrich Schmidt & Malte Loos, 2005. "Selfish-biased conditional cooperation: On the decline of contributions in repeated public goods experiments," Experimental 0503009, EconWPA.
- Tibor Neugebauer & Javier Perote & Ulrich Schmidt & Malte Loos, 2007. "Selfish-biased conditional cooperation: On the decline of contributions in repeated public goods experiments," Kiel Working Papers 1376, Kiel Institute for the World Economy.
- Olivier Armantier & Nicolas Treich, 2009.
"Subjective Probabilities In Games: An Application To The Overbidding Puzzle,"
International Economic Review,
Department of Economics, University of Pennsylvania and Osaka University Institute of Social and Economic Research Association, vol. 50(4), pages 1079-1102, November.
- Armantier, Olivier & Treich, Nicolas, 2009. "Subjective Probabilities in Games: An Application to the Overbidding Puzzle," Open Access publications from University of Toulouse 1 Capitole http://neeo.univ-tlse1.fr, University of Toulouse 1 Capitole.
- Camerer, Colin F. & Hogarth, Robin M., 1999.
"The Effects of Financial Incentives in Experiments: A Review and Capital-Labor-Production Framework,"
1059, California Institute of Technology, Division of the Humanities and Social Sciences.
- Camerer, Colin F & Hogarth, Robin M, 1999. "The Effects of Financial Incentives in Experiments: A Review and Capital-Labor-Production Framework," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 19(1-3), pages 7-42, December.
- Palfrey, Thomas R. & Wang, Stephanie W., .
"On eliciting beliefs in strategic games,"
1271, California Institute of Technology, Division of the Humanities and Social Sciences.
- Guarino, A & Huck, S & Jeitschko, TD, 2006.
"Averting economic collapse and the solipsism bias,"
Open Access publications from University College London
http://discovery.ucl.ac.u, University College London.
- Wolf Ze'ev Ehrblatt & Kyle Hyndman & Erkut Y. ÄOzbay & Andrew Schotter, 2006. "Convergence: An Experimental Study," Levine's Working Paper Archive 122247000000001148, David K. Levine.
- Ana Leon-Mejia & Luis M. Miller, 2007. "The Devil is in the Details - Sex Differences in Simple Bargaining Games," Jena Economic Research Papers 2007-069, Friedrich-Schiller-University Jena, Max-Planck-Institute of Economics.
- Erev, Ido & Bornstein, Gary & Wallsten, Thomas S., 1993. "The Negative Effect of Probability Assessments on Decision Quality," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 55(1), pages 78-94, June.
- Smith, Vernon L & Walker, James M, 1993. "Monetary Rewards and Decision Cost in Experimental Economics," Economic Inquiry, Western Economic Association International, vol. 31(2), pages 245-61, April.
- Andreas Ortmann & John Fitzgerald & Carl Boeing, 2000. "Trust, Reciprocity, and Social History: A Re-examination," Experimental Economics, Springer, vol. 3(1), pages 81-100, June.
- Blanco, Mariana & Engelmann, Dirk & Koch, Alexander K. & Normann, Hans-Theo, 2008.
"Belief Elicitation in Experiments: Is there a Hedging Problem?,"
IZA Discussion Papers
3517, Institute for the Study of Labor (IZA).
- Mariana Blanco & Dirk Engelmann & Alexander Koch & Hans-Theo Normann, 2010. "Belief elicitation in experiments: is there a hedging problem?," Experimental Economics, Springer, vol. 13(4), pages 412-438, December.
- Chou, Eileen & McConnell, Margaret & Nagel, Rosemarie & Plott, Charles R., 2007.
"The control of game form recognition in experiments: Understanding dominant strategy failures in a simple two person “Guessing” game,"
1274, California Institute of Technology, Division of the Humanities and Social Sciences.
- Eileen Chou & Margaret McConnell & Rosemarie Nagel & Charles Plott, 2009. "The control of game form recognition in experiments: understanding dominant strategy failures in a simple two person “guessing” game," Experimental Economics, Springer, vol. 12(2), pages 159-179, June.
- Andersen, Steffen & Fountain, John & Harrison, Glenn W. & Rutström, Elisabet E., 2009.
"Estimating Subjective Probabilities,"
05-2009, Copenhagen Business School, Department of Economics.
- Steffen Andersen & John Fountain & Glenn W. Harrison & E. Elisabet RutstrÃ¶m, 2010. "Estimating Subjective Probabilities," Experimental Economics Center Working Paper Series 2010-08, Experimental Economics Center, Andrew Young School of Policy Studies, Georgia State University.
- Yaw Nyarko & Andrew Schotter, 2002. "An Experimental Study of Belief Learning Using Elicited Beliefs," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 70(3), pages 971-1005, May.
- Offerman, Theo & Sonnemans, Joep & Schram, Arthur, 1996. "Value Orientations, Expectations and Voluntary Contributions in Public Goods," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 106(437), pages 817-45, July.
- Rutström, E. Elisabet & Wilcox, Nathaniel T., 2009. "Stated beliefs versus inferred beliefs: A methodological inquiry and experimental test," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 67(2), pages 616-632, November.
- Rey-Biel, Pedro, 2009.
"Equilibrium play and best response to (stated) beliefs in normal form games,"
Games and Economic Behavior,
Elsevier, vol. 65(2), pages 572-585, March.
- Pedro Rey-Biel, 2007. "Equilibrium Play and Best Response to (Stated) Beliefs in Normal Form Games," Working Papers 318, Barcelona Graduate School of Economics.
- Croson, Rachel T. A., 2000. "Thinking like a game theorist: factors affecting the frequency of equilibrium play," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 41(3), pages 299-314, March.
- Andrew Schotter & Barry Sopher, 2006. "Trust and trustworthiness in games: An experimental study of intergenerational advice," Experimental Economics, Springer, vol. 9(2), pages 123-145, June.
- Smith, Vernon L, 1976. "Experimental Economics: Induced Value Theory," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 66(2), pages 274-79, May.
- Irwin, Julie R, et al, 1998. "Payoff Dominance vs. Cognitive Transparency in Decision Making," Economic Inquiry, Western Economic Association International, vol. 36(2), pages 272-85, April.
- Vera Popva, 2010. "What renders financial advisors less treacherous? - On commissions and reciprocity -," Jena Economic Research Papers 2010-036, Friedrich-Schiller-University Jena, Max-Planck-Institute of Economics.
- Astrid Matthey & Tobias Regner, 2011. "More than outcomes: A cognitive dissonance-based explanation of other-regarding behavior," Jena Economic Research Papers 2011-024, Friedrich-Schiller-University Jena, Max-Planck-Institute of Economics.
- Jürgen Bracht & Tobias Regner, 2011. "Moral Emotions and Partnership," Jena Economic Research Papers 2011-028, Friedrich-Schiller-University Jena, Max-Planck-Institute of Economics.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Angel Solano Garcia.).
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.