IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/ecolet/v121y2013i2p198-201.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Evolutionary justifications for non-Bayesian beliefs

Author

Listed:
  • Zhang, Hanzhe

Abstract

This paper suggests that the evolutionarily optimal belief of an agent’s intrinsic reproductive ability is systematically different from the posterior belief obtained by the perfect Bayesian updating. In particular, the optimal belief depends on how risk-averse the agent is. Although the perfect Bayesian updating remains evolutionarily optimal for a risk-neutral agent, it is not for any other. Specifically, the belief is always positively biased for a risk-averse agent, and the more risk-averse an agent is, the more positively biased the optimally updated belief is. Such biased beliefs align with experimental findings and also offer an alternative explanation to the empirical puzzle that people across the population appear overconfident by consistently overestimating their personal hereditary traits.

Suggested Citation

  • Zhang, Hanzhe, 2013. "Evolutionary justifications for non-Bayesian beliefs," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 121(2), pages 198-201.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:ecolet:v:121:y:2013:i:2:p:198-201
    DOI: 10.1016/j.econlet.2013.08.016
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0165176513003789
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.econlet.2013.08.016?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 search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. , G. & , & ,, 2008. "Non-Bayesian updating: A theoretical framework," Theoretical Economics, Econometric Society, vol. 3(2), June.
    2. Larry G. Epstein, 2006. "An Axiomatic Model of Non-Bayesian Updating," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 73(2), pages 413-436.
    3. Roland Bénabou & Jean Tirole, 2005. "Self-Confidence and Personal Motivation," International Economic Association Series, in: Bina Agarwal & Alessandro Vercelli (ed.), Psychology, Rationality and Economic Behaviour, chapter 2, pages 19-57, Palgrave Macmillan.
    4. Alvaro Sandroni, 2000. "Do Markets Favor Agents Able to Make Accurate Predicitions?," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 68(6), pages 1303-1342, November.
    5. 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.
    6. Ali Jadbabaie & Alvaro Sandroni & Alireza Tahbaz-Salehi, 2010. "Non-Bayesian Social Learning, Second Version," PIER Working Paper Archive 10-005, Penn Institute for Economic Research, Department of Economics, University of Pennsylvania, revised 01 Feb 2010.
    7. Epstein Larry G & Noor Jawwad & Sandroni Alvaro, 2010. "Non-Bayesian Learning," The B.E. Journal of Theoretical Economics, De Gruyter, vol. 10(1), pages 1-20, January.
    8. Botond Köszegi, 2006. "Ego Utility, Overconfidence, and Task Choice," Journal of the European Economic Association, MIT Press, vol. 4(4), pages 673-707, June.
    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. Kim Gannon & Hanzhe Zhang, 2020. "An Evolutionary Justification for Overconfidence," Economics Bulletin, AccessEcon, vol. 40(3), pages 2494-2504.
    2. Takanori Ida & Ryo Okui, 2019. "Can information alleviate overconfidence? A randomized experiment on financial market predictions," Working Paper Series no126, Institute of Economic Research, Seoul National University.
    3. Herold, Florian & Netzer, Nick, 2023. "Second-best probability weighting," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 138(C), pages 112-125.
    4. Wu, Jiabin & Zhang, Hanzhe, 2021. "Preference evolution in different matching markets," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 137(C).

    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. Markus M. Möbius & Muriel Niederle & Paul Niehaus & Tanya S. Rosenblat, 2022. "Managing Self-Confidence: Theory and Experimental Evidence," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 68(11), pages 7793-7817, November.
    2. He, Xue Dong & Xiao, Di, 2017. "Processing consistency in non-Bayesian inference," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 70(C), pages 90-104.
    3. Bobba, Matteo & Frisancho, Veronica, 2022. "Self-perceptions about academic achievement: Evidence from Mexico City," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 231(1), pages 58-73.
    4. Banerjee, Ritwik & Gupta, Nabanita Datta & Villeval, Marie Claire, 2020. "Feedback spillovers across tasks, self-confidence and competitiveness," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 123(C), pages 127-170.
    5. González-Jiménez, Víctor, 2022. "Social status and motivated beliefs," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 211(C).
    6. Zimper, Alexander, 2023. "Unrealized arbitrage opportunities in naive equilibria with non-Bayesian belief processes," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 125(C), pages 27-41.
    7. Andrea Amelio & Florian Zimmermann, 2023. "Motivated Memory in Economics—A Review," Games, MDPI, vol. 14(1), pages 1-15, January.
    8. Li, Wenhui & Wilde, Christian, 2020. "Belief formation and belief updating under ambiguity: Evidence from experiments," SAFE Working Paper Series 251, Leibniz Institute for Financial Research SAFE, revised 2020.
    9. Hestermann, Nina & Le Yaouanq, Yves, 2018. "It\'s not my Fault! Self-Confidence and Experimentation," Rationality and Competition Discussion Paper Series 124, CRC TRR 190 Rationality and Competition.
    10. Katrin Gödker & Terrance Odean & Paul Smeets, 2023. "Disposed to Be Overconfident," CESifo Working Paper Series 10357, CESifo.
    11. Coutts, Alexander, 2019. "Testing models of belief bias: An experiment," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 113(C), pages 549-565.
    12. Ertac, Seda, 2011. "Does self-relevance affect information processing? Experimental evidence on the response to performance and non-performance feedback," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 80(3), pages 532-545.
    13. Mantilla, Cesar & Murad, Zahra, 2020. "Ego-relevance in team production," SocArXiv zy248, Center for Open Science.
    14. Roy-Chowdhury, V., 2022. "Self-Confidence and Motivated Memory Loss: Evidence from Schools," Cambridge Working Papers in Economics 2213, Faculty of Economics, University of Cambridge.
    15. Kwon, Seokbeom & Motohashi, Kazuyuki, 2017. "How institutional arrangements in the National Innovation System affect industrial competitiveness: A study of Japan and the U.S. with multiagent simulation," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 115(C), pages 221-235.
    16. Sun, Lan, 2016. "Hypothesis testing equilibrium in signaling games," Center for Mathematical Economics Working Papers 557, Center for Mathematical Economics, Bielefeld University.
    17. Manzan, Sebastiano, 2021. "Are professional forecasters Bayesian?," Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control, Elsevier, vol. 123(C).
    18. Jawwad Noor & Fernando Payró Chew, 2022. "An Axiomatic Approach to the Law of Small Numbers," Working Papers 1364, Barcelona School of Economics.
    19. Matthew Kovach, 2021. "Conservative Updating," Papers 2102.00152, arXiv.org.
    20. André Lapied & Thomas Rongiconi, 2013. "Ambiguity as a Source of Temptation: Modeling Unstable Beliefs," Working Papers halshs-00797631, HAL.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Non-Bayesian belief; Risk-aversion; Evolutionary economics; Overconfidence; Bias;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • C73 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Game Theory and Bargaining Theory - - - Stochastic and Dynamic Games; Evolutionary Games
    • D83 - Microeconomics - - Information, Knowledge, and Uncertainty - - - Search; Learning; Information and Knowledge; Communication; Belief; Unawareness

    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:eee:ecolet:v:121:y:2013:i:2:p:198-201. 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: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/ecolet .

    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.