Publikation: Biases in belief reports
Dateien
Datum
Autor:innen
Herausgeber:innen
ISSN der Zeitschrift
Electronic ISSN
ISBN
Bibliografische Daten
Verlag
Schriftenreihe
Auflagebezeichnung
URI (zitierfähiger Link)
DOI (zitierfähiger Link)
Internationale Patentnummer
Link zur Lizenz
Angaben zur Forschungsförderung
Projekt
Open Access-Veröffentlichung
Sammlungen
Core Facility der Universität Konstanz
Titel in einer weiteren Sprache
Publikationstyp
Publikationsstatus
Erschienen in
Zusammenfassung
Belief elicitation is important in many different fields of economic research. We show that how a researcher elicits such beliefs – in particular, whether the belief is about the participant’s opponent, an unrelated other, or the population of others – strongly affects the belief reports. We study the underlying processes and find a clear consensus effect. Yet, when matching the opponent’s action would lead to a low payoff and the researcher asks for the belief about this opponent, ex-post rationalization kicks in and beliefs are re-adjusted again. Hence, we recommend to ask about unrelated others or about the population in such cases, as ‘opponent beliefs’ are even more detached from the beliefs participants had when deciding about their actions in the corresponding game. We find no evidence of wishful thinking in any of the treatments.
Zusammenfassung in einer weiteren Sprache
Fachgebiet (DDC)
Schlagwörter
Konferenz
Rezension
Zitieren
ISO 690
FOLLI, Dominik, Irenaeus WOLFF, 2022. Biases in belief reports. In: Journal of Economic Psychology. Elsevier. 2022, 88, 102458. ISSN 0167-4870. eISSN 1872-7719. Available under: doi: 10.1016/j.joep.2021.102458BibTex
@article{Folli2022Biase-56694, year={2022}, doi={10.1016/j.joep.2021.102458}, title={Biases in belief reports}, volume={88}, issn={0167-4870}, journal={Journal of Economic Psychology}, author={Folli, Dominik and Wolff, Irenaeus}, note={Article Number: 102458} }
RDF
<rdf:RDF xmlns:dcterms="http://purl.org/dc/terms/" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" xmlns:rdf="http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#" xmlns:bibo="http://purl.org/ontology/bibo/" xmlns:dspace="http://digital-repositories.org/ontologies/dspace/0.1.0#" xmlns:foaf="http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/" xmlns:void="http://rdfs.org/ns/void#" xmlns:xsd="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema#" > <rdf:Description rdf:about="https://kops.uni-konstanz.de/server/rdf/resource/123456789/56694"> <dcterms:available rdf:datatype="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema#dateTime">2022-02-28T13:15:05Z</dcterms:available> <foaf:homepage rdf:resource="http://localhost:8080/"/> <dc:rights>terms-of-use</dc:rights> <dc:date rdf:datatype="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema#dateTime">2022-02-28T13:15:05Z</dc:date> <dcterms:title>Biases in belief reports</dcterms:title> <bibo:uri rdf:resource="https://kops.uni-konstanz.de/handle/123456789/56694"/> <dcterms:hasPart rdf:resource="https://kops.uni-konstanz.de/bitstream/123456789/56694/3/Folli_2-1nj9qn9e7tixi1.pdf"/> <dspace:hasBitstream rdf:resource="https://kops.uni-konstanz.de/bitstream/123456789/56694/3/Folli_2-1nj9qn9e7tixi1.pdf"/> <dc:contributor>Wolff, Irenaeus</dc:contributor> <void:sparqlEndpoint rdf:resource="http://localhost/fuseki/dspace/sparql"/> <dcterms:isPartOf rdf:resource="https://kops.uni-konstanz.de/server/rdf/resource/123456789/46"/> <dc:contributor>Folli, Dominik</dc:contributor> <dc:language>eng</dc:language> <dcterms:abstract xml:lang="eng">Belief elicitation is important in many different fields of economic research. We show that how a researcher elicits such beliefs – in particular, whether the belief is about the participant’s opponent, an unrelated other, or the population of others – strongly affects the belief reports. We study the underlying processes and find a clear consensus effect. Yet, when matching the opponent’s action would lead to a low payoff and the researcher asks for the belief about this opponent, ex-post rationalization kicks in and beliefs are re-adjusted again. Hence, we recommend to ask about unrelated others or about the population in such cases, as ‘opponent beliefs’ are even more detached from the beliefs participants had when deciding about their actions in the corresponding game. We find no evidence of wishful thinking in any of the treatments.</dcterms:abstract> <dcterms:rights rdf:resource="https://rightsstatements.org/page/InC/1.0/"/> <dc:creator>Wolff, Irenaeus</dc:creator> <dc:creator>Folli, Dominik</dc:creator> <dcterms:issued>2022</dcterms:issued> <dspace:isPartOfCollection rdf:resource="https://kops.uni-konstanz.de/server/rdf/resource/123456789/46"/> </rdf:Description> </rdf:RDF>