IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/bla/randje/v42y2011i3p575-594.html

The roles of reputation and transparency on the behavior of biased experts

Author

Listed:
  • Sylvain Bourjade
  • Bruno Jullien

Abstract

We analyze situations in which an expert is biased toward some decision but cares also about his reputation in the market for experts. The information the expert reveals decreases as his bias moves toward stronger preference for the status quo. We show that it is optimal to publicly disclose both the expert's contribution and his identity. Surprisingly, revealing the intensity of the expert's bias doesn't always improve the information he reveals in equilibrium. The presence of a second expert raises the first expert's incentives to report truthfully when reports are public, but reduces them when they are secret. In particular, having an option to call another expert may be detrimental in terms of information production if reports are not public. Finally, sequential consultation of experts reduces the information obtained when reports are public, but raises it when they are secret.
(This abstract was borrowed from another version of this item.)

Suggested Citation

  • Sylvain Bourjade & Bruno Jullien, 2011. "The roles of reputation and transparency on the behavior of biased experts," RAND Journal of Economics, RAND Corporation, vol. 42(3), pages 575-594, September.
    • Handle: RePEc:bla:randje:v:42:y:2011:i:3:p:575-594
    DOI: j.1756-2171.2011.00146.x
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1111/j.1756-2171.2011.00146.x
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/j.1756-2171.2011.00146.x?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
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to look for a different version below or

    for a different version of it.

    Other versions of this item:

    Citations

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


    Cited by:

    1. Andina-Díaz, Ascensión & García-Martínez, José A., 2025. "Garbling an evaluation to retain an advantage," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 172(C).
    2. Ispano, Alessandro, 2018. "Information acquisition and the value of bad news," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 110(C), pages 165-173.
    3. Yves Oytana, 2014. "The Judicial Expert in a Two-Tier Hierarchy," Journal of Institutional and Theoretical Economics (JITE), Mohr Siebeck, Tübingen, vol. 170(3), pages 537-570, September.
    4. Lukyanov, Georgy & Shamruk, Konstantin & Su, Tong & Wakrim, Ahmed, 2022. "Public communication with externalities," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 136(C), pages 177-196.
    5. Ascensión Andina Díaz & José A. García-Martínez, 2016. "A careerist judge with two concerns," Working Papers 2016-02, Universidad de Málaga, Department of Economic Theory, Málaga Economic Theory Research Center.
    6. Yves Oytana & Nathalie Chappe, 2018. "Expert opinion in a tort litigation game," European Journal of Law and Economics, Springer, vol. 46(1), pages 67-107, August.
    7. Kim, Doyoung, 2017. "Reputation Concerns And Authority In Organizations," Hitotsubashi Journal of Economics, Hitotsubashi University, vol. 58(2), pages 89-106, December.
    8. Pavesi, Filippo & Scotti, Massimo, 2022. "Good lies," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 141(C).
      • Filippo Pavesi & Massimo Scotti, 2019. "Good Lies," Working Paper Series 39, Economics Discipline Group, UTS Business School, University of Technology, Sydney.
    9. Andina-Díaz, Ascensión & García-Martínez, José A., 2023. "Reputation and perverse transparency under two concerns," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 79(C).
    10. Killian J. McCarthy & Florian Noseleit, 2022. "Too many cooks spoil the broth: on the impact of external advisors on mergers and acquisitions," Review of Managerial Science, Springer, vol. 16(6), pages 1817-1852, August.
    11. Georgy Lukyanov & Konstantin Shamruk & Tong Su & Ahmed Wakrim, 2025. "Public Communication with Externalities," Papers 2509.08850, arXiv.org.
    12. Kim, Doyoung, 2017. "Motivating for new changes when agents have reputation concerns," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 137(C), pages 37-53.
    13. Klein, Nicolas & Mylovanov, Tymofiy, 2017. "Will truth out?—An advisor’s quest to appear competent," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 72(C), pages 112-121.
    14. Bernardita Vial & Pilar Alcalde, 2020. "Intermediary Commissions in a Regulated Market with Heterogeneous Customers," Documentos de Trabajo 532, Instituto de Economia. Pontificia Universidad Católica de Chile..
    15. repec:ehu:dfaeii:8770 is not listed on IDEAS
    16. Hidir, Sinem, 2017. "Information Acquisition and Credibility in Cheap Talk," CRETA Online Discussion Paper Series 36, Centre for Research in Economic Theory and its Applications CRETA.
    17. Spagnolo, Giancarlo & Decarolis, Francesco & Iossa, Elisabetta & Mollisi, Vincenzo & Giuffrida, Leonardo, 2016. "Buyer Quality and Procurement Outcomes: Explorative Evidence From the US," SITE Working Paper Series 41, Stockholm School of Economics, Stockholm Institute of Transition Economics.

    More about this item

    JEL classification:

    • D82 - Microeconomics - - Information, Knowledge, and Uncertainty - - - Asymmetric and Private Information; Mechanism Design
    • L40 - Industrial Organization - - Antitrust Issues and Policies - - - General

    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:bla:randje:v:42:y:2011:i:3:p:575-594. 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: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/randdus.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.