IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/osf/osfxxx/vfqy2.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Information Theory and Biased Beliefs

Author

Listed:
  • Little, Andrew T.

Abstract

Beliefs can be incorrect or biased in many ways. I propose a unifying microfoundation for many well-documented biases using ideas from information theory. The common theme is that subjective beliefs are the solution to an optimization problem where one goal is accuracy, formalized by minimizing Kullback-Leibler divergence from the objective belief. Correct beliefs are a special case where accuracy is the only goal. Other goals or constraints produce biases such as motivated beliefs, partition dependence, anchoring, overconfidence, confirmation bias, base-rate neglect, and conservatism.

Suggested Citation

  • Little, Andrew T., 2022. "Information Theory and Biased Beliefs," OSF Preprints vfqy2, Center for Open Science.
  • Handle: RePEc:osf:osfxxx:vfqy2
    DOI: 10.31219/osf.io/vfqy2
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://osf.io/download/6384cbfa723a1115ae18c87a/
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.31219/osf.io/vfqy2?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Benjamin Enke, 2020. "What You See Is All There Is," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 135(3), pages 1363-1398.
    2. Bracha, Anat & Brown, Donald J., 2012. "Affective decision making: A theory of optimism bias," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 75(1), pages 67-80.
    3. Benjamin Enke & Thomas Graeber, 2019. "Cognitive Uncertainty," NBER Working Papers 26518, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    4. Erik Snowberg & Justin Wolfers, 2010. "Explaining the Favorite-Long Shot Bias: Is it Risk-Love or Misperceptions?," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 118(4), pages 723-746, August.
    5. Andrew Caplin & Mark Dean & John Leahy, 2019. "Rational Inattention, Optimal Consideration Sets, and Stochastic Choice," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 86(3), pages 1061-1094.
    6. Philippe Jehiel, 2018. "Investment Strategy and Selection Bias: An Equilibrium Perspective on Overoptimism," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 108(6), pages 1582-1597, June.
    7. Drew Fudenberg, 2006. "Advancing Beyond Advances in Behavioral Economics," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 44(3), pages 694-711, September.
    8. Xavier Gabaix, 2014. "A Sparsity-Based Model of Bounded Rationality," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 129(4), pages 1661-1710.
    9. Filip Matêjka & Alisdair McKay, 2015. "Rational Inattention to Discrete Choices: A New Foundation for the Multinomial Logit Model," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 105(1), pages 272-298, January.
    10. David Eil & Justin M. Rao, 2011. "The Good News-Bad News Effect: Asymmetric Processing of Objective Information about Yourself," American Economic Journal: Microeconomics, American Economic Association, vol. 3(2), pages 114-138, May.
    11. Victor Stango & Jonathan Zinman, 2023. "We Are All Behavioural, More, or Less: A Taxonomy of Consumer Decision-Making," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 90(3), pages 1470-1498.
    12. Andrew Caplin & Mark Dean & John Leahy, 2022. "Rationally Inattentive Behavior: Characterizing and Generalizing Shannon Entropy," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 130(6), pages 1676-1715.
    13. Daniel J. Benjamin & Don A. Moore & Matthew Rabin, 2017. "Biased Beliefs About Random Samples: Evidence from Two Integrated Experiments," NBER Working Papers 23927, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    14. Leeat Yariv, 2002. "I'll See It When I Believe It - A Simple Model of Cognitive Consistency," Cowles Foundation Discussion Papers 1352, Cowles Foundation for Research in Economics, Yale University.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. George Loewenstein & Zachary Wojtowicz, 2023. "The Economics of Attention," CESifo Working Paper Series 10712, CESifo.
    2. Bartosz Maćkowiak & Filip Matějka & Mirko Wiederholt, 2023. "Rational Inattention: A Review," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 61(1), pages 226-273, March.
    3. Kai Barron & Christina Gravert, 2022. "Confidence and Career Choices: An Experiment," Scandinavian Journal of Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 124(1), pages 35-68, January.
    4. Philippe Jehiel & Jakub Steiner, 2020. "Selective Sampling with Information-Storage Constraints [On interim rationality, belief formation and learning in decision problems with bounded memory]," The Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 130(630), pages 1753-1781.
    5. Ingar Haaland & Christopher Roth & Johannes Wohlfart, 2023. "Designing Information Provision Experiments," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 61(1), pages 3-40, March.
    6. Mogens Fosgerau & Emerson Melo & André de Palma & Matthew Shum, 2020. "Discrete Choice And Rational Inattention: A General Equivalence Result," International Economic Review, Department of Economics, University of Pennsylvania and Osaka University Institute of Social and Economic Research Association, vol. 61(4), pages 1569-1589, November.
    7. Barron, Kai & Huck, Steffen & Jehiel, Philippe, 2019. "Everyday econometricians: Selection neglect and overoptimism when learning from others," Discussion Papers, Research Unit: Economics of Change SP II 2019-301, WZB Berlin Social Science Center.
    8. Chen Lian, 2021. "A Theory of Narrow Thinking [What Do Consumers Consider Before They Choose? Identification from Asymmetric Demand Responses]," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 88(5), pages 2344-2374.
    9. Monte, Daniel & Linhares, Luis Henrique, 2023. "Stealth Startups, Clauses, and Add-ons: A Model of Strategic Obfuscation," MPRA Paper 115926, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    10. Xavier Gabaix, 2017. "Behavioral Inattention," NBER Working Papers 24096, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    11. Mattsson, Lars-Göran & Weibull, Jörgen W., 2023. "An analytically solvable principal-agent model," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 140(C), pages 33-49.
    12. Matysková, Ludmila & Montes, Alfonso, 2023. "Bayesian persuasion with costly information acquisition," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 211(C).
    13. Flynn, Joel P. & Sastry, Karthik A., 2023. "Strategic mistakes," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 212(C).
    14. Yoram Halevy & David Walker-Jones & Lanny Zrill, 2023. "Difficult Decisions," Working Papers tecipa-753, University of Toronto, Department of Economics.
    15. Frank Huettner & Tamer Boyacı & Yalçın Akçay, 2019. "Consumer Choice Under Limited Attention When Alternatives Have Different Information Costs," Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 67(3), pages 671-699, May.
    16. Martin Bustos, 2024. "Identification with Posterior-Separable Information Costs," Papers 2402.09789, arXiv.org.
    17. Steiner, Jakub & Jehiel, Philippe, 2017. "On Second Thoughts, Selective Memory, and Resulting Behavioral Biases," CEPR Discussion Papers 12546, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    18. Matějka, Filip & Mackowiak, Bartosz & Wiederholt, Mirko, 2018. "Survey: Rational Inattention, a Disciplined Behavioral Model," CEPR Discussion Papers 13243, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    19. Grove, Wayne A. & Jetter, Michael & Papps, Kerry L., 2018. "Career Lotto: Labor Supply in Winner-Take-All Markets," IZA Discussion Papers 12012, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    20. Atahan Afsar; José Elías Gallegos; Richard Jaimes; Edgar Silgado Gómez & José Elías Gallegos & Richard Jaimes & Edgar Silgado Gómez, 2020. "Reconciling Empirics and Theory: The Behavioral Hybrid New Keynesian Model," Vniversitas Económica 18560, Universidad Javeriana - Bogotá.

    More about this item

    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:osf:osfxxx:vfqy2. 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: OSF (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://osf.io/preprints/ .

    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.