IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/jobhdp/v114y2011i2p104-114.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Keeping the illusion of control under control: Ceilings, floors, and imperfect calibration

Author

Listed:
  • Gino, Francesca
  • Sharek, Zachariah
  • Moore, Don A.

Abstract

Prior research has claimed that people exaggerate probabilities of success by overestimating personal control in situations that are heavily or completely chance-determined. We examine whether such overestimation of control persists in situations where people do have control. Our results suggest a simple model that accounts for prior findings on illusory control as well as for situations where actual control is high: People make imperfect estimates of their level of control. By focusing on situations marked by low control, prior research has created the illusion that people generally overestimate their level of control. Across three studies, we show that when they have a great deal of control, people under-estimate it. Implications for research on perceived control and co-variation assessment are discussed.

Suggested Citation

  • Gino, Francesca & Sharek, Zachariah & Moore, Don A., 2011. "Keeping the illusion of control under control: Ceilings, floors, and imperfect calibration," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 114(2), pages 104-114, March.
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:jobhdp:v:114:y:2011:i:2:p:104-114
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0749-5978(10)00085-3
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    ---><---

    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. Moore, Don A. & Cain, Daylian M., 2007. "Overconfidence and underconfidence: When and why people underestimate (and overestimate) the competition," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 103(2), pages 197-213, July.
    2. Edwards, Jeffrey R., 1994. "The Study of Congruence in Organizational Behavior Research: Critique and a Proposed Alternative," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 58(1), pages 51-100, April.
    3. Ajzen, Icek, 1991. "The theory of planned behavior," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 50(2), pages 179-211, December.
    4. Dawes, Robyn M. & Mulford, Matthew, 1996. "The False Consensus Effect and Overconfidence: Flaws in Judgment or Flaws in How We Study Judgment?," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 65(3), pages 201-211, March.
    5. Heath, Chip & Tversky, Amos, 1991. "Preference and Belief: Ambiguity and Competence in Choice under Uncertainty," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 4(1), pages 5-28, January.
    6. Juslin, Peter, 1994. "The Overconfidence Phenomenon as a Consequence of Informal Experimenter-Guided Selection of Almanac Items," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 57(2), pages 226-246, February.
    7. Larrick, Richard P. & Burson, Katherine A. & Soll, Jack B., 2007. "Social comparison and confidence: When thinking you're better than average predicts overconfidence (and when it does not)," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 102(1), pages 76-94, January.
    8. Soll, Jack B., 1996. "Determinants of Overconfidence and Miscalibration: The Roles of Random Error and Ecological Structure," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 65(2), pages 117-137, February.
    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. Czupryna, Marcin & Kubińska, Elżbieta & Markiewicz, Łukasz & Tyszka, Tadeusz, 2021. "On the modified measure of illusion of control," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 90(C).
    2. Hsee, Christopher K. & Yang, Yang & Li, Xilin, 2019. "Relevance insensitivity: A new look at some old biases," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 153(C), pages 13-26.

    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. Merkle, Christoph & Weber, Martin, 2011. "True overconfidence: The inability of rational information processing to account for apparent overconfidence," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 116(2), pages 262-271.
    2. Olsson, Henrik, 2014. "Measuring overconfidence: Methodological problems and statistical artifacts," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 67(8), pages 1766-1770.
    3. Juslin, Peter & Winman, Anders & Olsson, Henrik, 2003. "Calibration, additivity, and source independence of probability judgments in general knowledge and sensory discrimination tasks," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 92(1-2), pages 34-51.
    4. Grieco, Daniela & Hogarth, Robin M., 2009. "Overconfidence in absolute and relative performance: The regression hypothesis and Bayesian updating," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 30(5), pages 756-771, October.
    5. Bruhin, Adrian & Santos-Pinto, Luís & Staubli, David, 2018. "How do beliefs about skill affect risky decisions?," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 150(C), pages 350-371.
    6. Dorota Skała, 2008. "Overconfidence in Psychology and Finance – an Interdisciplinary Literature Review," Bank i Kredyt, Narodowy Bank Polski, vol. 39(4), pages 33-50.
    7. Pavlo Blavatskyy, 2009. "Betting on own knowledge: Experimental test of overconfidence," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 38(1), pages 39-49, February.
    8. Brenner, Lyle & Griffin, Dale & Koehler, Derek J., 2005. "Modeling patterns of probability calibration with random support theory: Diagnosing case-based judgment," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 97(1), pages 64-81, May.
    9. Glaser, Markus & Weber, Martin, 2007. "Why inexperienced investors do not learn: They do not know their past portfolio performance," Finance Research Letters, Elsevier, vol. 4(4), pages 203-216, December.
    10. Brown, Jason L. & Farrington, Sukari & Sprinkle, Geoffrey B., 2016. "Biased self-assessments, feedback, and employees' compensation plan choices," Accounting, Organizations and Society, Elsevier, vol. 54(C), pages 45-59.
    11. Robin M. Hogarth & Natalia Karelaia, 2012. "Entrepreneurial Success and Failure: Confidence and Fallible Judgment," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 23(6), pages 1733-1747, December.
    12. Dennis Dittrich & Werner Guth & Boris Maciejovsky, 2005. "Overconfidence in investment decisions: An experimental approach," The European Journal of Finance, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 11(6), pages 471-491.
    13. Menkhoff, Lukas & Schmeling, Maik & Schmidt, Ulrich, 2013. "Overconfidence, experience, and professionalism: An experimental study," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 86(C), pages 92-101.
    14. Merkle, Christoph, 2017. "Financial overconfidence over time: Foresight, hindsight, and insight of investors," Journal of Banking & Finance, Elsevier, vol. 84(C), pages 68-87.
    15. Juslin, Peter & Olsson, Henrik & Winman, Anders, 1998. "The Calibration Issue: Theoretical Comments on Suantak, Bolger, and Ferrell (1996)," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 73(1), pages 3-26, January.
    16. Choi, Paul Moon Sub & Chung, Chune Young & Liu, Chang, 2018. "Self-attribution of overconfident CEOs and asymmetric investment-cash flow sensitivity," The North American Journal of Economics and Finance, Elsevier, vol. 46(C), pages 1-14.
    17. Bender, Randall H., 1998. "Judgment and Response Processes across Two Knowledge Domains," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 75(3), pages 222-257, September.
    18. Klayman, Joshua & Soll, Jack B. & Gonzalez-Vallejo, Claudia & Barlas, Sema, 1999. "Overconfidence: It Depends on How, What, and Whom You Ask, , , , , , , , ," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 79(3), pages 216-247, September.
    19. McKenzie, Craig R. M., 1997. "Underweighting Alternatives and Overconfidence," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 71(2), pages 141-160, August.
    20. Brenner, Lyle A., 2003. "A random support model of the calibration of subjective probabilities," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 90(1), pages 87-110, January.

    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:jobhdp:v:114:y:2011:i:2:p:104-114. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: . General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/obhdp .

    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/obhdp .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service hosted by the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis . RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.