IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/zbw/bonedp/392005.html

Effects of Feedback on Self-Assessment

Author

Listed:
  • Eberlein, Marion
  • Ludwig, Sandra
  • Nafziger, Julia

Abstract

It is a well-known phenomenon that people tend to overestimate their relative abilities. Psychological studies show that a vast majority of people thinks that their ability is above the average when they have to assess their position in a distribution of a target group. We analyse in an experiment whether this is still true when people receive feedback on their relative abilities. Our main finding is that feedback influences agent?s decisions and improves overall self-assessment.

Suggested Citation

  • Eberlein, Marion & Ludwig, Sandra & Nafziger, Julia, 2005. "Effects of Feedback on Self-Assessment," Bonn Econ Discussion Papers 39/2005, University of Bonn, Bonn Graduate School of Economics (BGSE).
    • Handle: RePEc:zbw:bonedp:392005
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.econstor.eu/bitstream/10419/22945/1/bgse39_2005.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Paul Ferraro, 2005. "Know thyself: Incompetence and overconfidence," Framed Field Experiments 00148, The Field Experiments Website.
    2. Dan Lovallo & Colin Camerer, 1999. "Overconfidence and Excess Entry: An Experimental Approach," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 89(1), pages 306-318, March.
    3. Barberis, Nicholas & Thaler, Richard, 2003. "A survey of behavioral finance," Handbook of the Economics of Finance, in: G.M. Constantinides & M. Harris & R. M. Stulz (ed.), Handbook of the Economics of Finance, edition 1, volume 1, chapter 18, pages 1053-1128, Elsevier.
    4. Markus Noth & Martin Weber, 2003. "Information Aggregation with Random Ordering: Cascades and Overconfidence," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 113(484), pages 166-189, January.
    5. Bruno Biais & Denis Hilton & Karine Mazurier & Sébastien Pouget, 2005. "Judgemental Overconfidence, Self-Monitoring, and Trading Performance in an Experimental Financial Market," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 72(2), pages 287-312.
    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. D. Urbig & J. Stauf & U. Weitzel, 2009. "What is your level of overconfidence? A strictly incentive compatible measurement of absolute and relative overconfidence," Working Papers 09-20, Utrecht School of Economics.
    2. Böheim, Renè & Horvath, Gerard Thomas & Winter-Ebmer, Rudolf, 2011. "Great expectations: Past wages and unemployment durations," Labour Economics, Elsevier, vol. 18(6), pages 778-785.
    3. Murad, Zahra & Starmer, Chris, 2021. "Confidence snowballing and relative performance feedback," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 190(C), pages 550-572.
    4. Herz, Holger & Schunk, Daniel & Zehnder, Christian, 2014. "How do judgmental overconfidence and overoptimism shape innovative activity?," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 83(C), pages 1-23.
    5. Mubashar Farooq & Dr. Muhamamd Aslam Khan, 2011. "Impact of Training and Feedback on Employee Performance," Far East Journal of Psychology and Business, Far East Research Centre, vol. 5(2), pages 23-33, October.

    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. Oberlechner, Thomas & Osler, Carol, 2012. "Survival of Overconfidence in Currency Markets," Journal of Financial and Quantitative Analysis, Cambridge University Press, vol. 47(1), pages 91-113, February.
    2. Jean‐Pierre Benoît & Juan Dubra, 2011. "Apparent Overconfidence," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 79(5), pages 1591-1625, September.
    3. Benoît, Jean-Pierre & Dubra, Juan, 2007. "Overconfidence?," MPRA Paper 5505, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    4. Hales, Jeffrey, 2009. "Are investors really willing to agree to disagree? An experimental investigation of how disagreement and attention to disagreement affect trading behavior," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 108(2), pages 230-241, March.
    5. Stefano DellaVigna, 2009. "Psychology and Economics: Evidence from the Field," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 47(2), pages 315-372, June.
    6. Corgnet, Brice & DeSantis, Mark & Porter, David, 2021. "Information aggregation and the cognitive make-up of market participants," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 133(C).
    7. Helen X. H. Bao & Steven Haotong Li, 2016. "Overconfidence And Real Estate Research: A Survey Of The Literature," The Singapore Economic Review (SER), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 61(04), pages 1-24, September.
    8. Guillaume Hollard & Sébastien Massoni & Jean-Christophe Vergnaud, 2010. "Subjective beliefs formation and elicitation rules: experimental evidence," Documents de travail du Centre d'Economie de la Sorbonne 10088, Université Panthéon-Sorbonne (Paris 1), Centre d'Economie de la Sorbonne.
    9. Shachar Kariv, 2005. "Overconfidence and Informational Cascades," Levine's Bibliography 122247000000000406, UCLA Department of Economics.
    10. Guillaume Hollard & Sébastien Massoni & Jean-Christophe Vergnaud, 2016. "In search of good probability assessors: an experimental comparison of elicitation rules for confidence judgments," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 80(3), pages 363-387, March.
    11. Dennis Dittrich & Werner Guth & Boris Maciejovsky, 2005. "Overconfidence in investment decisions: An experimental approach," The European Journal of Finance, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 11(6), pages 471-491.
    12. Véronique Bessière, 2007. "Excès de confiance des dirigeants et décisions financières:une synthèse," Revue Finance Contrôle Stratégie, revues.org, vol. 10(1), pages 39-66, March.
    13. Duersch, Peter & Lambrecht, Marco & Oechssler, Joerg, 2020. "Measuring skill and chance in games," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 127(C).
    14. Menkhoff, Lukas & Nikiforow, Marina, 2009. "Professionals' endorsement of behavioral finance: Does it impact their perception of markets and themselves?," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 71(2), pages 318-329, August.
    15. Francesco Bogliacino & Iván González-Gallo, 2015. "Aspirations, Prospect Theory and entrepreneurship: evidence from Colombia," International Review of Economics, Springer;Happiness Economics and Interpersonal Relations (HEIRS), vol. 62(3), pages 271-290, September.
    16. Utteeyo Dasgupta & Subha Mani & Lata Gangadharan & Pushkar Maitra & Samyukta Subramanian, 2012. "Choosing to be Trained: Evidence from a Field Experiment," Fordham Economics Discussion Paper Series dp2012_01, Fordham University, Department of Economics.
    17. Marco Haan & Bart Los & Yohanes Riyanto, 2011. "Signaling strength? An analysis of decision making in The Weakest Link," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 71(4), pages 519-537, October.
    18. John Morgan & Henrik Orzen & Martin Sefton & Dana Sisak, 2016. "Strategic and Natural Risk in Entrepreneurship: An Experimental Study," Journal of Economics & Management Strategy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 25(2), pages 420-454, April.
    19. Luigi Guiso & Tullio Jappelli, 2006. "Information Acquisition and Portfolio Performance," CeRP Working Papers 52, Center for Research on Pensions and Welfare Policies, Turin (Italy).
    20. Dasgupta, Utteeyo & Gangadharan, Lata & Maitra, Pushkar & Mani, Subha & Subramanian, Samyukta, 2015. "Choosing to be trained: Do behavioral traits matter?," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 110(C), pages 145-159.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;

    JEL classification:

    • D01 - Microeconomics - - General - - - Microeconomic Behavior: Underlying Principles
    • C91 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Design of Experiments - - - Laboratory, Individual Behavior
    • D80 - Microeconomics - - Information, Knowledge, and Uncertainty - - - General

    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:zbw:bonedp:392005. 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: ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/gsbonde.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.