IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/ucp/jpemic/doi10.1086-727556.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

A Check for Rational Inattention

Author

Listed:
  • Greg Howard

Abstract

Who is rationally inattentive, and in what situations? Models of rational inattention allow agents to make mistakes in their actions but assume the agents optimize their allocation of attention. Using millions of online chess moves, I test this assumption by comparing the marginal benefits (better moves) and marginal costs (less time for future moves) of attention. I find that high-skilled players equalize marginal benefit and cost, but low-skilled players have higher marginal cost (i.e., they spend too long on moves). I also find that having less time leads to deviations from rational inattention. A simple intervention improves players’ attention allocation.

Suggested Citation

  • Greg Howard, 2024. "A Check for Rational Inattention," Journal of Political Economy Microeconomics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 2(1), pages 172-199.
    • Handle: RePEc:ucp:jpemic:doi:10.1086/727556
    DOI: 10.1086/727556
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.1086/727556
    Download Restriction: Access to the online full text or PDF requires a subscription.
    File URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.1086/727556
    Download Restriction: Access to the online full text or PDF requires a subscription.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1086/727556?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:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Olivier Coibion & Yuriy Gorodnichenko & Saten Kumar, 2018. "How Do Firms Form Their Expectations? New Survey Evidence," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 108(9), pages 2671-2713, September.
    2. Mogens Fosgerau & Emerson Melo & Andre de Palma & Matthew Shum, 2017. "Discrete Choice and Rational Inattention: a General Equivalence Result," Papers 1709.09117, arXiv.org.
    3. Mogens Fosgerau & Emerson Melo & André de Palma & Matthew Shum, 2020. "Discrete Choice And Rational Inattention: A General Equivalence Result," International Economic Review, Department of Economics, University of Pennsylvania and Osaka University Institute of Social and Economic Research Association, vol. 61(4), pages 1569-1589, November.
    4. Dmitry Taubinsky & Alex Rees-Jones, 2018. "Attention Variation and Welfare: Theory and Evidence from a Tax Salience Experiment," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 85(4), pages 2462-2496.
    5. Andrew Caplin & Mark Dean, 2015. "Revealed Preference, Rational Inattention, and Costly Information Acquisition," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 105(7), pages 2183-2203, July.
    6. Andrew Caplin & Mark Dean & John Leahy, 2019. "Rational Inattention, Optimal Consideration Sets, and Stochastic Choice," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 86(3), pages 1061-1094.
    7. Lauren Cohen & Andrea Frazzini, 2008. "Economic Links and Predictable Returns," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 63(4), pages 1977-2011, August.
    8. Gerdes, Christer & Gränsmark, Patrik, 2010. "Strategic behavior across gender: A comparison of female and male expert chess players," Labour Economics, Elsevier, vol. 17(5), pages 766-775, October.
    9. Dewan, Ambuj & Neligh, Nathaniel, 2020. "Estimating information cost functions in models of rational inattention," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 187(C).
    10. Bartosz Maćkowiak & Filip Matějka & Mirko Wiederholt, 2023. "Rational Inattention: A Review," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 61(1), pages 226-273, March.
    11. Mondria, Jordi & Wu, Thomas & Zhang, Yi, 2010. "The determinants of international investment and attention allocation: Using internet search query data," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 82(1), pages 85-95, September.
    12. Hassan Afrouzi & Choongryul Yang, 2021. "Dynamic Rational Inattention and the Phillips Curve," CESifo Working Paper Series 8840, CESifo.
    13. Steven D. Levitt & John A. List & Sally E. Sadoff, 2011. "Checkmate: Exploring Backward Induction among Chess Players," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 101(2), pages 975-990, April.
    14. David Romer, 2006. "Do Firms Maximize? Evidence from Professional Football," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 114(2), pages 340-365, April.
    15. Iacus, Stefano M. & King, Gary & Porro, Giuseppe, 2012. "Causal Inference without Balance Checking: Coarsened Exact Matching," Political Analysis, Cambridge University Press, vol. 20(1), pages 1-24, January.
    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. Johannes Carow & Niklas M. Witzig, 2024. "Time Pressure and Strategic Risk-Taking in Professional Chess," Working Papers 2404, Gutenberg School of Management and Economics, Johannes Gutenberg-Universität Mainz.

    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. Bartosz Maćkowiak & Filip Matějka & Mirko Wiederholt, 2023. "Rational Inattention: A Review," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 61(1), pages 226-273, March.
    2. Martin Bustos, 2024. "Identification with Posterior-Separable Information Costs," Papers 2402.09789, arXiv.org.
    3. Flynn, Joel P. & Sastry, Karthik A., 2023. "Strategic mistakes," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 212(C).
    4. Cristina Gualdani & Shruti Sinha, 2023. "Identification in Discrete Choice Models with Imperfect Information," Working Papers 949, Queen Mary University of London, School of Economics and Finance.
    5. Chen, Xin & Jiang, Gege & Jiang, Yu, 2025. "Multivariate discrete choice with rational inattention: Model development, application, and calibration," Transportation Research Part E: Logistics and Transportation Review, Elsevier, vol. 194(C).
    6. Avoyan, Ala & Romagnoli, Giorgia, 2023. "Paying for inattention," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 226(C).
    7. Gualdani, Cristina & Sinha, Shruti, 2024. "Identification in discrete choice models with imperfect information," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 244(1).
    8. Lindbeck, Assar & Weibull, Jörgen, 2020. "Delegation of investment decisions, and optimal remuneration of agents," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 129(C).
    9. Civelli, Andrea & Deck, Cary & Tutino, Antonella, 2022. "Attention and choices with multiple states and actions: A laboratory experiment," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 199(C), pages 86-102.
    10. Isaac Baley & Laura Veldkamp, 2021. "Bayesian learning," Economics Working Papers 1797, Department of Economics and Business, Universitat Pompeu Fabra.
    11. Bertoli, Simone & Moraga, Jesús Fernández-Huertas & Guichard, Lucas, 2020. "Rational inattention and migration decisions," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 126(C).
    12. S. Cerreia-Vioglio & F. Maccheroni & M. Marinacci & A. Rustichini, 2017. "Multinomial logit processes and preference discovery: inside and outside the black box," Working Papers 615, IGIER (Innocenzo Gasparini Institute for Economic Research), Bocconi University.
    13. Cristina Gualdani & Shruti Sinha, 2019. "Identification in discrete choice models with imperfect information," Papers 1911.04529, arXiv.org, revised Dec 2023.
    14. Botond Kőszegi & Filip Matějka, 2020. "Choice Simplification: A Theory of Mental Budgeting and Naive Diversification [“Fungibility, Labels, and Consumption,”]," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 135(2), pages 1153-1207.
    15. Jianjun Miao & Hao Xing, 2024. "Dynamic discrete choice under rational inattention," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 77(3), pages 597-652, May.
    16. Spyros Galanis & Sergei Mikhalishchev, 2024. "Information Aggregation with Costly Information Acquisition," Papers 2406.07186, arXiv.org, revised Jun 2025.
    17. Xavier Gabaix, 2017. "Behavioral Inattention," NBER Working Papers 24096, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    18. Zhou, Bo & Liu, Ronghui, 2024. "A generalized rationally inattentive route choice model with non-uniform marginal information costs," Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Elsevier, vol. 189(C).
    19. Heinke, Steve, 2024. "Top–down and bottom–up information acquisition: Application to financial markets," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 237(C).
    20. Sergey Turlo & Matteo Fina & Johannes Kasinger & Arash Laghaie & Thomas Otter, 2025. "Discrete choice in marketing through the lens of rational inattention," Quantitative Marketing and Economics (QME), Springer, vol. 23(1), pages 45-104, March.

    More about this item

    JEL classification:

    • C72 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Game Theory and Bargaining Theory - - - Noncooperative Games
    • D83 - Microeconomics - - Information, Knowledge, and Uncertainty - - - Search; Learning; Information and Knowledge; Communication; Belief; Unawareness
    • D91 - Microeconomics - - Micro-Based Behavioral Economics - - - Role and Effects of Psychological, Emotional, Social, and Cognitive Factors on Decision Making

    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:ucp:jpemic:doi:10.1086/727556. 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: Journals Division (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.journals.uchicago.edu/JPEMI .

    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.