IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/aea/aecrev/v112y2022i4p1118-46.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Self-Persuasion: Evidence from Field Experiments at International Debating Competitions

Author

Listed:
  • Peter Schwardmann
  • Egon Tripodi
  • Joël J. van der Weele

Abstract

Laboratory evidence shows that when people have to argue for a given position, they persuade themselves about the position's factual and moral superiority. Such self-persuasion limits the potential of communication to resolve conflict and reduce polarization. We test for this phenomenon in a field setting, at international debating competitions that randomly assign experienced and motivated debaters to argue one side of a topical motion. We find self-persuasion in factual beliefs and confidence in one's position. Effect sizes are smaller than in the laboratory, but robust to a one-hour exchange of arguments and a tenfold increase in incentives for accuracy.

Suggested Citation

  • Peter Schwardmann & Egon Tripodi & Joël J. van der Weele, 2022. "Self-Persuasion: Evidence from Field Experiments at International Debating Competitions," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 112(4), pages 1118-1146, April.
  • Handle: RePEc:aea:aecrev:v:112:y:2022:i:4:p:1118-46
    DOI: 10.1257/aer.20200372
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.aeaweb.org/doi/10.1257/aer.20200372
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.3886/E148242V1
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://www.aeaweb.org/doi/10.1257/aer.20200372.appx
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://www.aeaweb.org/doi/10.1257/aer.20200372.ds
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to AEA members and institutional subscribers.

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1257/aer.20200372?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
    ---><---

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Jonathan de Quidt & Johannes Haushofer & Christopher Roth, 2018. "Measuring and Bounding Experimenter Demand," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 108(11), pages 3266-3302, November.
    2. Harrison, Glenn W. & Martínez-Correa, Jimmy & Swarthout, J. Todd, 2014. "Eliciting subjective probabilities with binary lotteries," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 101(C), pages 128-140.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Jeanne Hagenbach & Charlotte Saucet, 2024. "Motivated Skepticism," SciencePo Working papers Main hal-03770685, HAL.
    2. Jeanne Hagenbach & Charlotte Saucet, 2024. "Motivated Skepticism," Université Paris1 Panthéon-Sorbonne (Post-Print and Working Papers) hal-03770685, HAL.
    3. Roth, Christopher & Chopra, Felix & Haaland, Ingar, 2022. "The Demand for News: Accuracy Concerns versus Belief Confirmation Motives," CEPR Discussion Papers 17169, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    4. Deivis Angeli & Matt Lowe & The Village Team & Matthew Lowe, 2023. "Virtue Signals," CESifo Working Paper Series 10475, CESifo.
    5. Prati, Alberto & Saucet, Charlotte, 2024. "The causal effect of a health treatment on beliefs, stated preferences and memories," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 122150, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    6. Amasino, Dianna R. & Pace, Davide Domenico & van der Weele, Joël, 2023. "Self-serving bias in redistribution choices: Accounting for beliefs and norms," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 98(C).
    7. Jeanne Hagenbach & Charlotte Saucet, 2024. "Motivated Skepticism," Working Papers hal-03770685, HAL.
    8. Buser, Thomas, 2024. "Adversarial Economic Preferences Predict Right-Wing Voting," IZA Discussion Papers 16711, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    9. Grunewald, Andreas & Klockmann, Victor & von Schenk, Alicia & von Siemens, Ferdinand, 2024. "Are biases contagious? The influence of communication on motivated beliefs," W.E.P. - Würzburg Economic Papers 109, University of Würzburg, Department of Economics.
    10. Katharina Momsen & Sebastian O. Schneider, 2022. "Motivated Reasoning, Information Avoidance, and Default Bias," Working Papers 2022-05, Faculty of Economics and Statistics, Universität Innsbruck.
    11. Lata Gangadharan & Philip J. Grossman & Nina Xue, 2022. "Stepping Stone: Identifying self-image concerns from motivated beliefs: Does it matter how and whom you ask?," Monash Economics Working Papers 2022-05, Monash University, Department of Economics.

    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. Peter Schwardmann & Egon Tripodi & Joël J. van der Weele, 2019. "Self-Persuasion: Evidence from Field Experiments at Two International Debating Competitions," CESifo Working Paper Series 7946, CESifo.
    2. Christopher Roth & Johannes Wohlfart, 2020. "How Do Expectations about the Macroeconomy Affect Personal Expectations and Behavior?," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 102(4), pages 731-748, October.
    3. Giuseppe Attanasi & Roberta Dessi & Frédéric Moisan & Donald Robertson, 2019. "Public Goods and Future Audiences: Acting as Role Models?," GREDEG Working Papers 2019-27, Groupe de REcherche en Droit, Economie, Gestion (GREDEG CNRS), Université Côte d'Azur, France.
    4. Francesco Capozza & Ingar Haaland & Christopher Roth & Johannes Wohlfart, 2021. "Studying Information Acquisition in the Field: A Practical Guide and Review," CEBI working paper series 21-15, University of Copenhagen. Department of Economics. The Center for Economic Behavior and Inequality (CEBI).
    5. Christopher Roth & Sonja Settele & Johannes Wohlfart, 2022. "Risk Exposure and Acquisition of Macroeconomic Information," American Economic Review: Insights, American Economic Association, vol. 4(1), pages 34-53, March.
    6. Schnorpfeil, Philip & Weber, Michael & Hackethal, Andreas, 2023. "Households' response to the wealth effects of inflation," SAFE Working Paper Series 400, Leibniz Institute for Financial Research SAFE.
    7. Kessel, Dany & Mollerstrom, Johanna & van Veldhuizen, Roel, 2021. "Can simple advice eliminate the gender gap in willingness to compete?," EconStor Open Access Articles and Book Chapters, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics, vol. 138, pages 1-1.
    8. repec:zbw:bofrdp:2020_017 is not listed on IDEAS
    9. Andrea F.M. Martinangeli & Lisa Windsteiger, 2019. "Immigration vs. Poverty: Causal Impact on Demand for Redistribution in a Survey Experiment," Working Papers tax-mpg-rps-2019-13, Max Planck Institute for Tax Law and Public Finance.
    10. Stephanie Mertens & Ulf J. J. Hahnel & Tobias Brosch, 2020. "This way, please: Uncovering the directional effects of attribute translations on decision making," Judgment and Decision Making, Society for Judgment and Decision Making, vol. 15(1), pages 25-46, January.
    11. Chopra, Felix & Haaland, Ingar & Roth, Christopher, 2021. "The Demand for FactChecking," CAGE Online Working Paper Series 563, Competitive Advantage in the Global Economy (CAGE).
    12. Beutel, Johannes & Metiu, Norbert & Stockerl, Valentin, 2021. "Toothless tiger with claws? Financial stability communication, expectations, and risk-taking," Journal of Monetary Economics, Elsevier, vol. 120(C), pages 53-69.
    13. Cattaneo, Maria & Lergetporer, Philipp & Schwerdt, Guido & Werner, Katharina & Woessmann, Ludger & Wolter, Stefan C., 2020. "Information provision and preferences for education spending: Evidence from representative survey experiments in three countries," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 63(C).
    14. 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.
    15. Sophie Cetre, 2020. "Essays on the determinants of wage inequality," Sciences Po publications info:hdl:2441/53c4o1e509l, Sciences Po.
    16. Bogliacino, Francesco & Mantilla, César & Niño, Daniel, 2023. "Economic incentives and political inequality in the management of environmental public goods," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 104(C).
    17. Amanda Kvarven & Eirik Strømland & Conny Wollbrant & David Andersson & Magnus Johannesson & Gustav Tinghög & Daniel Västfjäll & Kristian Ove R. Myrseth, 2020. "The intuitive cooperation hypothesis revisited: a meta-analytic examination of effect size and between-study heterogeneity," Journal of the Economic Science Association, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 6(1), pages 26-42, June.
    18. Gianmarco Daniele & Andrea F.M. Martinangeli & Francesco Passarelli & Willem Sas & Lisa Windsteiger, 2020. "When Distrust Goes Viral: Causal Effects of Covid-19 on European Political Attitudes," CESifo Working Paper Series 8804, CESifo.
    19. Sonja Settele, 2019. "How Do Beliefs about the Gender Wage Gap Affect the Demand for Public Policy?," CEBI working paper series 19-13, University of Copenhagen. Department of Economics. The Center for Economic Behavior and Inequality (CEBI).
    20. Ortiz-Riomalo, Juan Felipe & Koessler, Ann-Kathrin & Engel, Stefanie, 2021. "Inducing perspective-taking for prosocial behaviour in natural resource management," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 110(C).
    21. Bagues, Manuel & Roth, Christopher, 2020. "Interregional Contact and National Identity," CAGE Online Working Paper Series 526, Competitive Advantage in the Global Economy (CAGE).

    More about this item

    JEL classification:

    • C93 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Design of Experiments - - - Field Experiments
    • D12 - Microeconomics - - Household Behavior - - - Consumer Economics: Empirical Analysis
    • D72 - Microeconomics - - Analysis of Collective Decision-Making - - - Political Processes: Rent-seeking, Lobbying, Elections, Legislatures, and Voting Behavior
    • D83 - Microeconomics - - Information, Knowledge, and Uncertainty - - - Search; Learning; Information and Knowledge; Communication; Belief; Unawareness
    • D91 - Microeconomics - - Micro-Based Behavioral Economics - - - Role and Effects of Psychological, Emotional, Social, and Cognitive Factors on Decision Making
    • I23 - Health, Education, and Welfare - - Education - - - Higher Education; Research Institutions

    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:aea:aecrev:v:112:y:2022:i:4:p:1118-46. 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: Michael P. Albert (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/aeaaaea.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.