Belief Elicitation When More Than Money Matters: Controlling for “Control”

Incentive compatible mechanisms for eliciting beliefs typically presume that the utilty of money is state independent, or that money is the only argument in utility functions. However, subjects may have non-monetary objectives that confound the mechanisms. In particular, psychologists have argued th...

Descripción completa

Guardado en:
Detalles Bibliográficos
Autor principal: Benoît, Jean-Pierre (author)
Otros Autores: Dubra, Juan (author)
Formato: report
Lenguaje:inglés
Publicado: 2020
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://hdl.handle.net/20.500.12806/2747
Etiquetas: Agregar Etiqueta
Sin Etiquetas, Sea el primero en etiquetar este registro!
_version_ 1868890166346645504
author Benoît, Jean-Pierre
author2 Dubra, Juan
author2_role author
author_browse Benoît, Jean-Pierre
Dubra, Juan
author_facet Benoît, Jean-Pierre
Dubra, Juan
author_role author
collection REDUM
dc.creator.none.fl_str_mv Benoît, Jean-Pierre
Dubra, Juan
dc.date.none.fl_str_mv 2020
2025-09-11T14:25:59Z
2025-09-11T14:25:59Z
dc.format.none.fl_str_mv 65
text/plain
dc.identifier.none.fl_str_mv https://hdl.handle.net/20.500.12806/2747
dc.language.none.fl_str_mv eng
dc.publisher.none.fl_str_mv Universidad de Montevideo, Facultad de Ciencias Empresariales y Economía
dc.rights.none.fl_str_mv Abierto
info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess
Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 Internacional
http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/
dc.source.none.fl_str_mv reponame:REDUM
instname:Universidad de Montevideo
instacron:Universidad de Montevideo
dc.subject.none.fl_str_mv Elicitation
Overconfidence
Control
Experimental Methods
dc.title.none.fl_str_mv Belief Elicitation When More Than Money Matters: Controlling for “Control”
dc.type.none.fl_str_mv Reporte técnico
info:eu-repo/semantics/report
Aceptada
info:eu-repo/semantics/acceptedVersion
description Incentive compatible mechanisms for eliciting beliefs typically presume that the utilty of money is state independent, or that money is the only argument in utility functions. However, subjects may have non-monetary objectives that confound the mechanisms. In particular, psychologists have argued that people favour bets where their ability is involved over equivalent random bets -a so-called preference for control. We propose a new belief elicitation method that mitigates the control preference. Using this method, we determine that under the ostensibly incentive compatible matching probabilities method, our subjects report self-beliefs 18% higher than their true beliefs in order to increase control. Non-monetary objectives account for at least 68% of what would normally be measured as overconfidence. Our mechanism can be used to yield better measurements of beliefs in contexts beyond the study of overconfidence. Our paper also contributes to a refined understanding of control. We find that control manifests itself only as a desire for betting on doing well; betting on doing badly is perceived as a negative.
eu_rights_str_mv openAccess
format report
id anni_b05f5e516ec4d158e2f93baf070fe0e5
instacron_str Universidad de Montevideo
institution Universidad de Montevideo
instname_str Universidad de Montevideo
language eng
network_acronym_str anni
network_name_str oai-lr-anni
oai_identifier_str oai:redum.um.edu.uy:20.500.12806/2747
publishDate 2020
publishDateSort 2020
publisher.none.fl_str_mv Universidad de Montevideo, Facultad de Ciencias Empresariales y Economía
reponame_str REDUM
repository.mail.fl_str_mv
repository.name.fl_str_mv
repository_id_str
rights_invalid_str_mv Abierto
Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 Internacional
http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/
spelling Belief Elicitation When More Than Money Matters: Controlling for “Control”Benoît, Jean-PierreDubra, JuanElicitationOverconfidenceControlExperimental MethodsIncentive compatible mechanisms for eliciting beliefs typically presume that the utilty of money is state independent, or that money is the only argument in utility functions. However, subjects may have non-monetary objectives that confound the mechanisms. In particular, psychologists have argued that people favour bets where their ability is involved over equivalent random bets -a so-called preference for control. We propose a new belief elicitation method that mitigates the control preference. Using this method, we determine that under the ostensibly incentive compatible matching probabilities method, our subjects report self-beliefs 18% higher than their true beliefs in order to increase control. Non-monetary objectives account for at least 68% of what would normally be measured as overconfidence. Our mechanism can be used to yield better measurements of beliefs in contexts beyond the study of overconfidence. Our paper also contributes to a refined understanding of control. We find that control manifests itself only as a desire for betting on doing well; betting on doing badly is perceived as a negative.Universidad de Montevideo, Facultad de Ciencias Empresariales y Economía2025-09-11T14:25:59Z2025-09-11T14:25:59Z2020Reporte técnicoinfo:eu-repo/semantics/reportAceptadainfo:eu-repo/semantics/acceptedVersion65text/plainhttps://hdl.handle.net/20.500.12806/2747reponame:REDUMinstname:Universidad de Montevideoinstacron:Universidad de MontevideoengAbiertoinfo:eu-repo/semantics/openAccessAttribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 Internacionalhttp://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/oai:redum.um.edu.uy:20.500.12806/27472026-06-16T07:01:54Z
spellingShingle Belief Elicitation When More Than Money Matters: Controlling for “Control”
Benoît, Jean-Pierre
Elicitation
Overconfidence
Control
Experimental Methods
status_str acceptedVersion
title Belief Elicitation When More Than Money Matters: Controlling for “Control”
title_full Belief Elicitation When More Than Money Matters: Controlling for “Control”
title_fullStr Belief Elicitation When More Than Money Matters: Controlling for “Control”
title_full_unstemmed Belief Elicitation When More Than Money Matters: Controlling for “Control”
title_short Belief Elicitation When More Than Money Matters: Controlling for “Control”
title_sort Belief Elicitation When More Than Money Matters: Controlling for “Control”
topic Elicitation
Overconfidence
Control
Experimental Methods
url https://hdl.handle.net/20.500.12806/2747