IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/eid/wpaper/58169.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Gazes and numbers: Two experiments in strategic sophistication and gender bias

Author

Listed:
  • Maria Cubel

    (University of Bath)

  • Santiago Sanchez-Pages

    (King's College London)

Abstract

We investigate whether gender differences in strategic behavior depend on the perceived gender bias of strategic interactions. We use two weakly dominance solvable games where a prize is at stake. The first one is the two-person beauty contest, where strategies are numbers and players must perform mathematical operations. The second is the novel "gaze coach game", where strategies are photographs of the eye region and the two players must assign emotional states to these images. We find that males display significantly higher strategic sophistication than females in the first game but not in the second one, which is perceived to be female biased. However, females are underrepresented among top performers in both games.

Suggested Citation

  • Maria Cubel & Santiago Sanchez-Pages, 2021. "Gazes and numbers: Two experiments in strategic sophistication and gender bias," Department of Economics Working Papers 78/21, University of Bath, Department of Economics.
    • Handle: RePEc:eid:wpaper:58169
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://purehost.bath.ac.uk/ws/files/227521907/WPBath78.21.pdf
    File Function: Final published version
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Nagel, Rosemarie & Bühren, Christoph & Frank, Björn, 2017. "Inspired and inspiring: Hervé Moulin and the discovery of the beauty contest game," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 90(C), pages 191-207.
    2. Iriberri, Nagore & Rey-Biel, Pedro, 2017. "Stereotypes are only a threat when beliefs are reinforced: On the sensitivity of gender differences in performance under competition to information provision," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 135(C), pages 99-111.
    3. Brañas-Garza, Pablo & García-Muñoz, Teresa & González, Roberto Hernán, 2012. "Cognitive effort in the Beauty Contest Game," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 83(2), pages 254-260.
    4. Glenn Ellison & Ashley Swanson, 2010. "The Gender Gap in Secondary School Mathematics at High Achievement Levels: Evidence from the American Mathematics Competitions," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 24(2), pages 109-128, Spring.
    5. Ciril Bosch-Rosa & Thomas Meissner, 2020. "The one player guessing game: a diagnosis on the relationship between equilibrium play, beliefs, and best responses," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 23(4), pages 1129-1147, December.
    6. Peter Backus & María Cubel & Matej Guid & Santiago Sánchez-Pages & Enrique Lopez Manas, 2016. "Gender, competition and performance:Evidence from real tournaments," Working Papers 2016/27, Institut d'Economia de Barcelona (IEB).
    7. Thomas Breda & Elyes Jouini & Clotilde Napp, 2018. "Societal inequalities amplify gender gaps in math," PSE-Ecole d'économie de Paris (Postprint) hal-01745438, HAL.
    8. Eduardo Fé & David Gill & Victoria Prowse, 2022. "Cognitive Skills, Strategic Sophistication, and Life Outcomes," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 130(10), pages 2643-2704.
    9. Ayala Arad & Ariel Rubinstein, 2012. "The 11-20 Money Request Game: A Level-k Reasoning Study," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 102(7), pages 3561-3573, December.
    10. Russell Davidson & Jean-Yves Duclos, 2000. "Statistical Inference for Stochastic Dominance and for the Measurement of Poverty and Inequality," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 68(6), pages 1435-1464, November.
    11. Robert Östling & Joseph Tao-yi Wang & Eileen Y. Chou & Colin F. Camerer, 2011. "Testing Game Theory in the Field: Swedish LUPI Lottery Games," American Economic Journal: Microeconomics, American Economic Association, vol. 3(3), pages 1-33, August.
    12. Uri Gneezy & Muriel Niederle & Aldo Rustichini, 2003. "Performance in Competitive Environments: Gender Differences," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 118(3), pages 1049-1074.
    13. Burnham, Terence C. & Cesarini, David & Johannesson, Magnus & Lichtenstein, Paul & Wallace, Björn, 2009. "Higher cognitive ability is associated with lower entries in a p-beauty contest," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 72(1), pages 171-175, October.
    14. Grosskopf, Brit & Nagel, Rosemarie, 2008. "The two-person beauty contest," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 62(1), pages 93-99, January.
    15. Uri Gneezy & Aldo Rustichini, 2004. "Gender and Competition at a Young Age," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 94(2), pages 377-381, May.
    16. Colin F. Camerer & Teck-Hua Ho & Juin-Kuan Chong, 2004. "A Cognitive Hierarchy Model of Games," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 119(3), pages 861-898.
    17. Dietmar Fehr & Steffen Huck, 2016. "Who knows it is a game? On strategic awareness and cognitive ability," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 19(4), pages 713-726, December.
    18. James C. Cox & Duncan James, 2012. "Clocks and Trees: Isomorphic Dutch Auctions and Centipede Games," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 80(2), pages 883-903, March.
    19. Eileen Chou & Margaret McConnell & Rosemarie Nagel & Charles Plott, 2009. "The control of game form recognition in experiments: understanding dominant strategy failures in a simple two person “guessing” game," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 12(2), pages 159-179, June.
    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. Cubel, María & Sanchez-Pages, Santiago, 2022. "Gender differences in equilibrium play and strategic sophistication variability," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 194(C), pages 287-299.
    2. Maria Cubel & Santiago Sanchez-Pages, 2016. "Gender differences and stereotypes in strategic thinking," UB School of Economics Working Papers 2016/338, University of Barcelona School of Economics.
    3. María Cubel & Santiago Sanchez-Pages, 2014. "Gender differences and stereotypes in the beauty contest," Working Papers 2014/13, Institut d'Economia de Barcelona (IEB).
    4. María Cubel & Santiago Sanchez-Pages, 2014. "Gender differences and stereotypes in the beauty contest," Working Papers 2014/13, Institut d'Economia de Barcelona (IEB).
    5. Nagel, Rosemarie & Bühren, Christoph & Frank, Björn, 2017. "Inspired and inspiring: Hervé Moulin and the discovery of the beauty contest game," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 90(C), pages 191-207.
    6. Choo, Lawrence C.Y & Kaplan, Todd R., 2014. "Explaining Behavior in the "11-20" Game," MPRA Paper 52808, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    7. Hanaki, Nobuyuki & Koriyama, Yukio & Sutan, Angela & Willinger, Marc, 2019. "The strategic environment effect in beauty contest games," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 113(C), pages 587-610.
    8. Despoina Alempaki & Andrew M. Colman & Felix Kölle & Graham Loomes & Briony D. Pulford, 2022. "Investigating the failure to best respond in experimental games," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 25(2), pages 656-679, April.
    9. Mauersberger, Felix & Nagel, Rosemarie & Bühren, Christoph, 2020. "Bounded rationality in Keynesian beauty contests: A lesson for central bankers?," Economics - The Open-Access, Open-Assessment E-Journal (2007-2020), Kiel Institute for the World Economy (IfW Kiel), vol. 14, pages 1-38.
    10. Gill, David & Knepper, Zachary & Prowse, Victoria & Zhou, Junya, 2025. "How cognitive skills affect strategic behavior: Cognitive ability, fluid intelligence and judgment," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 149(C), pages 82-95.
    11. Ye Jin, 2021. "Does level-k behavior imply level-k thinking?," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 24(1), pages 330-353, March.
    12. Georganas, Sotiris & Healy, Paul J. & Weber, Roberto A., 2015. "On the persistence of strategic sophistication," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 159(PA), pages 369-400.
    13. José de Sousa & Guillaume Hollard, 2021. "From Micro to Macro Gender Differences: Evidence from Field Tournaments," Post-Print hal-03389151, HAL.
    14. Joshua Zonca & Giorgio Coricelli & Luca Polonio, 2020. "Gaze patterns disclose the link between cognitive reflection and sophistication in strategic interaction," Judgment and Decision Making, Society for Judgment and Decision Making, vol. 15(2), pages 230-245, March.
    15. José De Sousa & Guillaume Hollard, 2023. "From Micro to Macro Gender Differences: Evidence from Field Tournaments," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 69(6), pages 3358-3399, June.
    16. repec:spo:wpmain:info:hdl:2441/5msrbb0rie9sjq3c4ejgb2v91o is not listed on IDEAS
    17. Bayer, R.-C. & Renou, Ludovic, 2016. "Logical abilities and behavior in strategic-form games," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 56(C), pages 39-59.
    18. Berger, Ulrich & De Silva, Hannelore & Fellner-Röhling, Gerlinde, 2016. "Cognitive hierarchies in the minimizer game," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 130(C), pages 337-348.
    19. Nir Halevy, 2020. "Strategic thinking and behavior during a pandemic," Judgment and Decision Making, Society for Judgment and Decision Making, vol. 15(5), pages 648-659, September.
    20. King King Li & Kang Rong, 2024. "A two-step guessing game," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 97(1), pages 89-108, August.
    21. repec:cup:judgdm:v:15:y:2020:i:2:p:230-245 is not listed on IDEAS
    22. Ballester, Coralio & Rodriguez-Moral, Antonio & Vorsatz, Marc, 2024. "Cognitive reflection in experimental anchored guessing games," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 148(C), pages 179-195.

    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:eid:wpaper:58169. 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: Scholarly Communications Librarian (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/debatuk.html .

    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.