IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/soceco/v113y2024ics2214804324001435.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

‘Update Bias’: Manipulating past information based on the existing circumstances

Author

Listed:
  • Umer, Hamza
  • Kurosaki, Takashi

Abstract

Many panel surveys elicit information about past events multiple times. It is, however, unclear whether respondents manipulate their past information and update it according to their current circumstances in the later rounds of the panel. We term such a systematic bias in reporting past information as “update bias” in this study. We systematically test the presence of update bias in panel data by comparing teenage religiosity obtained from adults first in 2019 and later in 2022 in the Netherlands. Respondents who become more (less) religious in 2022 than 2019 are likelier to report a higher (lower) teenage religiosity in 2022. Even when we use data with a narrower gap (2019 and 2020 survey waves), we still obtain similar results. Overall, the analysis provides strong evidence for update bias. We suggest that the theory of cognitive dissonance best explains our findings; individuals manipulate their teenage religiosity to minimize dissonance between the past and current religious state and to obtain a higher satisfaction. Unlike predominant existing literature that argues people modify their current beliefs according to previous anchors, we provide contrary evidence where people manipulate their past beliefs following their current circumstances.

Suggested Citation

  • Umer, Hamza & Kurosaki, Takashi, 2024. "‘Update Bias’: Manipulating past information based on the existing circumstances," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 113(C).
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:soceco:v:113:y:2024:i:c:s2214804324001435
    DOI: 10.1016/j.socec.2024.102306
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2214804324001435
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.socec.2024.102306?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

    for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Isis Gaddis & Gbemisola Oseni & Amparo Palacios-Lopez & Janneke Pieters, 2021. "Measuring Farm Labor: Survey Experimental Evidence from Ghana," The World Bank Economic Review, World Bank, vol. 35(3), pages 604-634.
    2. Calogero Carletto & Dean Jolliffe & Raka Banerjee, 2015. "From Tragedy to Renaissance: Improving Agricultural Data for Better Policies," Journal of Development Studies, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 51(2), pages 133-148, February.
    3. Wollburg, Philip & Tiberti, Marco & Zezza, Alberto, 2021. "Recall length and measurement error in agricultural surveys," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 100(C).
    4. Daron Acemoglu & Ali Cheema & Asim I. Khwaja & James A. Robinson, 2020. "Trust in State and Nonstate Actors: Evidence from Dispute Resolution in Pakistan," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 128(8), pages 3090-3147.
    5. Beegle, Kathleen & Carletto, Calogero & Himelein, Kristen, 2012. "Reliability of recall in agricultural data," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 98(1), pages 34-41.
    6. Godlonton, Susan & Hernandez, Manuel A. & Paz, Cynthia, 2021. "Can survey design reduce anchoring bias in recall data? Evidence from Malawi," IFPRI discussion papers 2055, International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI).
    7. Kilic, Talip & Moylan, Heather & Ilukor, John & Mtengula, Clement & Pangapanga-Phiri, Innocent, 2021. "Root for the tubers: Extended-harvest crop production and productivity measurement in surveys," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 102(C).
    8. Ryan Oprea & Sevgi Yuksel, 2022. "Social Exchange of Motivated Beliefs," Journal of the European Economic Association, European Economic Association, vol. 20(2), pages 667-699.
    9. Furnham, Adrian & Boo, Hua Chu, 2011. "A literature review of the anchoring effect," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 40(1), pages 35-42, February.
    10. Yves Le Yaouanq & Peter Schwardmann, 2022. "Learning About One’s Self," Journal of the European Economic Association, European Economic Association, vol. 20(5), pages 1791-1828.
    11. Gilad, Benjamin & Kaish, Stanley & Loeb, Peter D., 1987. "Cognitive dissonance and utility maximization : A general framework," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 8(1), pages 61-73, March.
    12. Akerlof, George A & Dickens, William T, 1982. "The Economic Consequences of Cognitive Dissonance," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 72(3), pages 307-319, June.
    13. repec:mpr:mprres:4832 is not listed on IDEAS
    14. James P. Smith & Duncan Thomas, 2003. "Remembrances of things past: test–retest reliability of retrospective migration histories," Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series A, Royal Statistical Society, vol. 166(1), pages 23-49, February.
    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. Wollburg, Philip & Tiberti, Marco & Zezza, Alberto, 2021. "Recall length and measurement error in agricultural surveys," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 100(C).
    2. Adzawla, William & Setsoafia, Edinam D. & Setsoafia, Eugene D. & Amoabeng-Nimako, Solomon & Atakora, Williams K. & Bindraban, Prem D., 2024. "Accuracy of agricultural data and implications for policy: Evidence from maize farmer recall surveys and crop cuts in the Guinea Savannah zone of Ghana," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 214(C).
    3. Calogero Carletto, 2021. "Better data, higher impact: improving agricultural data systems for societal change [Correlated non-classical measurement errors, ‘second best’ policy inference, and the inverse size-productivity r," European Review of Agricultural Economics, Oxford University Press and the European Agricultural and Applied Economics Publications Foundation, vol. 48(4), pages 719-740.
    4. Elena Serfilippi & Daniele Giovannucci & David Ameyaw & Ankur Bansal & Thomas Asafua Nketsia Wobill & Roberta Blankson & Rashi Mishra, 2022. "Benefits and Challenges of Making Data More Agile: A Review of Recent Key Approaches in Agriculture," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(24), pages 1-18, December.
    5. Hosseini, Hamid, 2003. "The arrival of behavioral economics: from Michigan, or the Carnegie School in the 1950s and the early 1960s?," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 32(4), pages 391-409, September.
    6. Peterson-Wilhelm, Bailey & Schwab, Benjamin, 2024. "How does recall bias in farm labor impact separability tests?," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 128(C).
    7. Gosnell, Greer K., 2018. "Communicating Resourcefully: A Natural Field Experiment on Environmental Framing and Cognitive Dissonance in Going Paperless," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 154(C), pages 128-144.
    8. Kai Barron, 2021. "Belief updating: does the ‘good-news, bad-news’ asymmetry extend to purely financial domains?," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 24(1), pages 31-58, March.
    9. Nir, A., 2004. "A Behavioral Model of Conumption Patterns : The Effects of Cognitive Dissonance and Conformity," Discussion Paper 2004-48, Tilburg University, Center for Economic Research.
    10. Bruno S. Frey & Reiner Eichenberger, 1989. "Should Social Scientists Care about Choice Anomalies?," Rationality and Society, , vol. 1(1), pages 101-122, July.
    11. Vaiknoras, Kate & Larochelle, Catherine & Alwang, Jeffrey, 2020. "IFAD RESERACH SERIES 64 - How the adoption of drought-tolerant rice varieties impacts households in a non-drought year: Evidence from Nepal," IFAD Research Series 308809, International Fund for Agricultural Development (IFAD).
    12. Nir, A., 2004. "Cognitive Procedures and Hyperbolic Discounting," Other publications TiSEM e26d6ae0-fc76-4fb2-b845-4, Tilburg University, School of Economics and Management.
    13. Abay,Kibrom A. & Barrett,Christopher B. & Kilic,Talip & Moylan,Heather G. & Ilukor,John & Vundru,Wilbert Drazi, 2022. "Nonclassical Measurement Error and Farmers’ Response to Information Reveal Behavioral Anomalies," Policy Research Working Paper Series 9908, The World Bank.
    14. Sam Desiere & Lotte Staelens & Marijke D’Haese, 2016. "When the Data Source Writes the Conclusion: Evaluating Agricultural Policies," Journal of Development Studies, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 52(9), pages 1372-1387, September.
    15. Jose Galdo & Ana C Dammert & Degnet Abebaw, 2021. "Gender Bias in Agricultural Child Labor: Evidence from Survey Design Experiments," The World Bank Economic Review, World Bank, vol. 35(4), pages 872-891.
    16. Amadu, Festus O. & McNamara, Paul E. & Miller, Daniel C., 2020. "Yield effects of climate-smart agriculture aid investment in southern Malawi," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 92(C).
    17. Bruno Frey & Alois Stutzer, 2005. "Happiness Research: State and Prospects," Review of Social Economy, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 63(2), pages 207-228.
    18. Jules Gazeaud & Victor Stephane, 2023. "Productive Workfare? Evidence from Ethiopia's Productive Safety Net Program," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 105(1), pages 265-290, January.
    19. Evans, David K. & Mendez Acosta, Amina, 2023. "How to measure student absenteeism in low- and middle-income countries," Economics of Education Review, Elsevier, vol. 96(C).
    20. Ismael Yacoubou Djima & Marco Tiberti & Talip Kilic, 2024. "Yielding Insights : Machine Learning-Driven Imputations to Filling Agricultural Data Gaps," Policy Research Working Paper Series 10964, The World Bank.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;

    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:soceco:v:113:y:2024:i:c:s2214804324001435. 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/inca/620175 .

    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.