Overconfidence in tournaments: evidence from the field
- First Online:
This paper uses a field survey to investigate the quality of individuals’ beliefs of relative performance in tournaments. We consider two field settings, poker and chess, which differ in the degree to which luck is a factor and also in the information that players have about the ability of the competition. We find that poker players’ forecasts of relative performance are random guesses with an overestimation bias. Chess players also overestimate their relative performance but make informed guesses. We find support for the “unskilled and unaware hypothesis” in chess: high-skilled chess players make better forecasts than low-skilled chess players. Finally, we find that chess players’ forecasts of relative performance are not efficient.
KeywordsTournaments Rationality Field experiment
JEL ClassificationA12 C93 J41
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
- Camerer C. (1990) Do markets correct biases in probability judgement? Evidence from market experiments. In: Kagel J., Green L. (eds) Advances in behavioral economics. Vol. 2. Ablex Publishing, Northwood, NJ, pp 125–172Google Scholar
- DeGroot M. (1970) Optimal statistical decisions. McGraw Hill, New YorkGoogle Scholar
- Moore, D. (2002). Egocentric biases and the failure of strategic prediction. In International Association of Conflict Management, 15th Annual Conference, June 9–12, Park City, Utah.Google Scholar
- Myers D. (1996) Social psychology. McGraw-Hill, New YorkGoogle Scholar
- Rabin M. (1998) Psychology and economics. Journal of Economic Literature XXXVI: 11–46Google Scholar
- Zarembka P. (1974) Transformation of variables in econometrics. In: Zarembka Paul (eds) Frontiers in econometrics. Academic Press, New YorkGoogle Scholar