IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/oup/qjecon/v140y2025i1p335-401..html

Overinference from Weak Signals and Underinference from Strong Signals

Author

Listed:
  • Ned Augenblick
  • Eben Lazarus
  • Michael Thaler

Abstract

When people receive new information, sometimes they revise their beliefs too much, and sometimes too little. We show that a key driver of whether people overinfer or underinfer is the strength of the information. Based on a model in which people know which direction to update in, but not exactly how much to update, we hypothesize that people will overinfer from weak signals and underinfer from strong signals. We then test this hypothesis across four different environments: abstract experiments, a naturalistic experiment, sports betting markets, and financial markets. In each environment, our consistent and robust finding is overinference from weak signals and underinference from strong signals. Our framework and findings can help harmonize apparently contradictory results from the experimental and empirical literatures.

Suggested Citation

  • Ned Augenblick & Eben Lazarus & Michael Thaler, 2025. "Overinference from Weak Signals and Underinference from Strong Signals," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 140(1), pages 335-401.
  • Handle: RePEc:oup:qjecon:v:140:y:2025:i:1:p:335-401.
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1093/qje/qjae032
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    ---><---

    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. Thomas Graeber & Shakked Noy & Christopher Roth & Thomas W. Graeber, 2025. "The Transmission of Reliable and Unreliable Information," CESifo Working Paper Series 12109, CESifo.
    2. Mel Win Khaw & Ziang Li & Michael Woodford, 2022. "Cognitive Imprecision and Stake-Dependent Risk Attitudes," CESifo Working Paper Series 9923, CESifo.
    3. Luca Braghieri, 2023. "Biased Decoding and the Foundations of Communication," CESifo Working Paper Series 10432, CESifo.
    4. Kenneth Chan & Gary Charness & Chetan Dave & J. Lucas Reddinger, 2024. "On Prior Confidence and Belief Updating," Working Papers 2024-10, University of Alberta, Department of Economics.
    5. Charlotte Cordes & Jana Friedrichsen & Simeon Schudy, 2023. "Motivated Procrastination," Rationality and Competition Discussion Paper Series 471, CRC TRR 190 Rationality and Competition.
    6. Philipp Denter & Boris Ginzburg, 2024. "Troll Farms," Papers 2411.03241, arXiv.org.
    7. repec:ces:ceswps:_11072 is not listed on IDEAS
    8. Larry G Epstein & Kaushil Patel, 2024. "Identifying Heterogeneous Decision Rules From Choices When Menus Are Unobserved," Papers 2405.09500, arXiv.org.
    9. Yongheng Hu, 2025. "How Big Data Dilutes Cognitive Resources, Interferes with Rational Decision-making and Affects Wealth Distribution ?," Papers 2508.20435, arXiv.org, revised Aug 2025.

    More about this item

    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:oup:qjecon:v:140:y:2025:i:1:p:335-401.. 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: Oxford University Press (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://academic.oup.com/qje .

    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.