IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/cpr/ceprdp/20013.html

Who Prefers Guessing to Admitting They Don’t Know? Measurement Error in Financial Literacy Surveys

Author

Listed:
  • Bertola, Giuseppe
  • Lo Prete, Anna

Abstract

A propensity to guess randomly rather than to admit ignorance answering "Don’t know" is a plausible reason why frequent wrong answers are given to survey questions that aim to assess competence. We model this source of measurement error and assess its empirical relevance in two consecutive waves of a survey of financial literacy. Misclassification of standard financial literacy indicators is very likely, especially in some demographic groups. Respondents who answer correctly in both waves of the survey are less likely to have guessed in the first wave, and have a lower probability of reporting financial difficulties than those who guessed and were lucky enough to appear literate.

Suggested Citation

  • Bertola, Giuseppe & Lo Prete, Anna, 2025. "Who Prefers Guessing to Admitting They Don’t Know? Measurement Error in Financial Literacy Surveys," CEPR Discussion Papers 20013, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    • Handle: RePEc:cpr:ceprdp:20013
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://cepr.org/publications/DP20013
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    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:cpr:ceprdp:20013. 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: CEPR (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://cepr.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.