IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/arx/papers/2506.12167.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Nondistortionary belief elicitation

Author

Listed:
  • Marcin Pk{e}ski
  • Colin Stewart

Abstract

A researcher wants to ask a decision-maker about a belief related to a choice the decision-maker made; examples include eliciting confidence or cognitive uncertainty. When can the researcher provide incentives for the decision-maker to report her belief truthfully without distorting her choice? We identify necessary and sufficient conditions for nondistortionary elicitation and fully characterize all incentivizable questions in three canonical classes of problems. For these problems, we show how to elicit beliefs using variants of the Becker-DeGroot-Marschak mechanism.

Suggested Citation

  • Marcin Pk{e}ski & Colin Stewart, 2025. "Nondistortionary belief elicitation," Papers 2506.12167, arXiv.org.
    • Handle: RePEc:arx:papers:2506.12167
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://arxiv.org/pdf/2506.12167
    File Function: Latest version
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Karl Schlag & James Tremewan & Joël Weele, 2015. "A penny for your thoughts: a survey of methods for eliciting beliefs," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 18(3), pages 457-490, September.
    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. Gächter, Simon & Starmer, Chris & Tufano, Fabio, 2022. "Measuring 'Group Cohesion' to Reveal the Power of Social Relationships in Team Production," IZA Discussion Papers 15512, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    2. Chih-Chung Ting & Nahuel Salem-Garcia & Stefano Palminteri & Jan B. Engelmann & Maël Lebreton, 2023. "Neural and computational underpinnings of biased confidence in human reinforcement learning," Nature Communications, Nature, vol. 14(1), pages 1-18, December.
    3. Aycinena, Diego & Bogliacino, Francesco & Kimbrough, Erik O., 2024. "Measuring norms: Assessing the threat of social desirability bias to the Bicchieri and Xiao elicitation method," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 222(C), pages 225-239.
    4. Foster, Gigi & Frijters, Paul & Schaffner, Markus & Torgler, Benno, 2018. "Expectation formation in an evolving game of uncertainty: New experimental evidence," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 154(C), pages 379-405.
    5. James C. Cox & Vjollca Sadiraj, 2018. "Incentives," Experimental Economics Center Working Paper Series 2018-01, Experimental Economics Center, Andrew Young School of Policy Studies, Georgia State University.
    6. Daniel Woods & Maroš Servátka, 2019. "Nice to you, nicer to me: Does self-serving generosity diminish the reciprocal response?," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 22(2), pages 506-529, June.
    7. Jarke-Neuert, Johannes & Perino, Grischa & Schwickert, Henrike, 2021. "Free-Riding for Future: Field Experimental Evidence of Strategic Substitutability in Climate Protest," SocArXiv sh6dm, Center for Open Science.
    8. Denis Tverskoi & Andrea Guido & Giulia Andrighetto & Angel Sánchez & Sergey Gavrilets, 2023. "Disentangling material, social, and cognitive determinants of human behavior and beliefs," Palgrave Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 10(1), pages 1-13, December.
    9. Jan B. Engelmann & Maël Lebreton & Nahuel A. Salem-Garcia & Peter Schwardmann & Joël J. van der Weele, 2024. "Anticipatory Anxiety and Wishful Thinking," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 114(4), pages 926-960, April.
    10. Lee, Natalie, 2023. "Feigning ignorance for long-term gains," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 138(C), pages 42-71.
    11. Bergemann, Dirk & Ottaviani, Marco, 2021. "Information Markets and Nonmarkets," CEPR Discussion Papers 16459, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    12. Norde, Henk & Voorneveld, Mark, 2019. "Feasible best-response correspondences and quadratic scoring rules," SSE Working Paper Series in Economics 2019:2, Stockholm School of Economics.
    13. Grewenig, Elisabeth & Lergetporer, Philipp & Werner, Katharina & Woessmann, Ludger, 2022. "Incentives, search engines, and the elicitation of subjective beliefs: Evidence from representative online survey experiments," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 231(1), pages 304-326.
    14. Roel van Veldhuizen, 2022. "Gender Differences in Tournament Choices: Risk Preferences, Overconfidence, or Competitiveness?," Journal of the European Economic Association, European Economic Association, vol. 20(4), pages 1595-1618.
    15. Bose, Subir & Daripa, Arup, 2023. "Eliciting second-order beliefs," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 107(C).
    16. Raphael Guber & Martin G. Kocher & Joachim Winter, 2021. "Does having insurance change individuals' self‐confidence?," Journal of Risk & Insurance, The American Risk and Insurance Association, vol. 88(2), pages 429-442, June.
    17. Crosetto, Paolo & Filippin, Antonio & Katuščák, Peter & Smith, John, 2020. "Central tendency bias in belief elicitation," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 78(C).
    18. de Haan, Thomas, 2020. "Eliciting belief distributions using a random two-level partitioning of the state space," Working Papers in Economics 1/20, University of Bergen, Department of Economics.
    19. Masiliūnas, Aidas & Nax, Heinrich H., 2020. "Framing and repeated competition," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 124(C), pages 604-619.
    20. Vanessa Valero, 2022. "Redistribution and beliefs about the source of income inequality," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 25(3), pages 876-901, June.

    More about this item

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    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:arx:papers:2506.12167. 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: arXiv administrators (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://arxiv.org/ .

    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.