Who performs better under time pressure? Results from a field experiment

We investigate whether and how time pressure affects performance. We conducted a field experiment in which students from an Italian University are proposed to choose between two exam schemes: a standard scheme without time pressure and an alternative scheme consisting of two written intermediate tests, one of which to be taken under time pressure. Students deciding to sustain the alternative exam are randomly assigned to a “time pressure” and a “no time pressure” group. Students performing under time pressure at the first test perform in absence of time pressure at the second test and vice versa. We find that being exposed to time pressure exerts a negative and statistically significant impact on students’ performance. The effect is driven by a strong negative impact on females’ performance, while there is no statistically significant effect on males. Both the quantity and quality of females’ work is hampered by time pressure. Using data on students’ expectations, we also find that the effect produced by time pressure on performance was correctly perceived by students. Female students expect a lower grade when working under time pressure, while males do not. These findings contribute to explain why women tend to shy away from jobs and careers involving time pressure.     

The Role of Perceived Control and Overconfidence in Pathological Gambling

Two studies sought to determine whether perceived control has different effects on confidence assessment and betting decisions among pathological and problem gamblers than among non-problem gamblers. In Study 1, 200 college students who were frequent gamblers (80 female and 120 male, median age 20) completed the South Oaks Gambling Screen (SOGS) and then engaged in a task in which they answered questions, assessed confidence in each answer, and considered bets on their answers that were fair if they were well-calibrated, but unfavorable if they were overconfident. Probable pathological and problem gamblers earned significantly fewer points than non-problem gamblers. This was due to greater overconfidence among pathological and problem gamblers, which led to systematically less favorable bets. In Study 2, using 384 participants (105 female and 279 male, median age 20), control was independently manipulated and bets were constructed to make point value independent of overconfidence. Problem and pathological gamblers showed both greater overconfidence and greater bet acceptance. They were less affected by control in their betting decisions than non-problem gamblers, but more affected in the slope of their betting function. It is concluded that pathological and problem gamblers process information about confidence and control differently from non-problem gamblers.     

Overfeed the Bold,Starve the Cowardly: A Legend or Reality?

Although the negative effects of overconfidence are more likely to be mentioned in the literature, some researchers have argued that the benefits of overconfidence may outweigh its costs. We attempted to explore the positive effects of overconfidence in competitive situations. We had participants compete against fake opponents who were overconfident and then measured their competitive performance in two studies. In Study 1 we examined the effects of overconfidence on competitive performance in a competitive situation and the possible mechanism for this overconfidence. In Study 2 we investigated the characteristics of the performance in a competition after a mismatch between the level of confidence and the fake opponent’s actual competence was revealed. Our results indicated that overconfident individuals tend to be perceived as more competent and more likely to benefit in the process of competition. Even after a mismatch between the level of confidence and the real competence was revealed, the overconfident individuals were not punished in that they made as much money as the less overconfident and still got higher competence ratings. Together those studies suggested that overconfidence has its advantages in competitive situations.     

Overconfident health workers provide lower quality healthcare

While a growing body of evidence suggests that healthcare workers in low and middle-income countries often provide poor quality of care, the reasons behind such low performance remain unclear. The literature on medical decision-making suggests that cognitive biases, or failures related to the way healthcare providers think, explain many diagnostic errors. This study investigates whether one cognitive bias, overconfidence, defined as the tendency to overestimate one’s performance relative to others, is associated with the low quality of care provided in Senegal. We link survey data on the overconfidence of health workers to objective measures of the quality of care they provide to standardised patients – enumerators who pose as real patients and record details of the consultation. We find that about a third of providers are overconfident – meaning that they overestimate their own abilities relative to their peers. We then show that overconfident providers are 26% less likely to manage patients correctly and exert less effort in clinical practice. These results suggest that the low levels of quality of care observed in some settings could be partly explained by the cognitive biases of providers, such as overconfidence. Policies that encourage adequate supervision and feedback to healthcare workers might reduce such failures in clinical decision-making.     

Overconfidence in absolute and relative performance: The regression hypothesis and Bayesian updating

Studies have found that people are overconfident in estimation involving difficult tasks but underconfident in easy tasks. Conversely, they are overconfident in placing themselves in easy tasks but underconfident in hard tasks. These findings can be explained by a regression hypothesis that implies random errors in estimation as well as by rational Bayesian updating (that implies no random error). We test these hypotheses in five experiments. We find overconfidence in estimation involving hard tasks but underconfidence in easy tasks. However, for placement (involving both easy and hard tasks) we find no overconfidence, regression effects due to low and high anchor points, and extreme underconfidence when people choose between multiple alternatives. On the other hand, when given precise information about absolute performance, people’s re-assessments of relative performance are consistent with the Bayesian model. Since placement judgments are important in many competitive settings, our results emphasize the need for more research to identify their determinants.     

Sympathetic Magic and Gambling: Adherence to the Law of Contagion Varies with Gambling Severity

This study assessed adherence to the law of contagion by 118 undergraduate students (39 males). Participants were students who played a slot machine game after viewing a prior player who seemed to be winning (“lucky” condition) or losing (“unlucky” condition). Adherence to the law of contagion was assessed by the selection of the coin holder used by a “lucky” prior player and the avoidance of the coin holder used by an “unlucky” prior player. Contagion varied directly with scores on the Problem Gambling Severity Index and scores on the Luck/Perseverance subscale of the Gamblers’ Belief Questionnaire (Steenbergh et al. in Psychol Addict Behav 16(2):143–149, 2002). Gamblers high in problem severity chose the “lucky” coin holder and avoided the “unlucky” coin holder significantly more than gamblers low in problem severity. Problem gamblers, therefore, exhibit evidence of magical thinking related to the transfer of a “lucky” essence. The same was the case for individuals with a strong level of belief that sheer continuation in gambling (luck perseverance) results in success and for individuals who believe that luck is a personal rather than a situational characteristic. All three variables (problem gambling severity, luck perseverance and personal luck) had direct effects on behavior reflecting irrational magical thinking. A belief that knowledge or skill has a role in successful gaming was unrelated to magical thinking. These findings suggest potential foci for cognitive interventions with problem gamblers and those with non-skill based evidence of irrational thinking.     

Exponential-growth bias and overconfidence

There is increasing evidence that people underestimate the magnitude of compounding interest. However, if people were aware of their inability to make such calculations they should demand services to ameliorate the consequences of such deficiencies. In a laboratory experiment, we find that people exhibit substantial exponential-growth bias but, more importantly, that they are overconfident in their ability to answer questions that involve exponential growth. They also exhibit overconfidence in their ability to use a spreadsheet to answer these questions. This evidence explains why a market solution to exponential-growth bias has not been forthcoming. Biased individuals have suboptimally low demand for tools and services that could improve their financial decisions.     

Students’ preference for grading rules: The role of ratio bias

Ratio bias exists if people perceive the likelihood of an event to be greater when it is presented as a ratio with large numbers (e.g., 10 in 100) than when it is presented as a ratio with small numbers (e.g., 1 in 10). This study shows the prevalence of ratio bias by examining students’ preference for grading rules at a college that uses a relative grading system. The study was conducted in an institution allowing instructors who teach multiple classes of the same course to grade students as if they are enrolled in a single class by pooling students of different classes (pooled grading, or PG). The other (default) alternative was to grade students separately based on each class (separate grading, or SG). We find that students strongly prefer PG to SG, which indicates that students’ preferences are affected by ratio bias. We also find that preference for PG is not affected by gender, but older students are less likely to choose PG than younger ones. Lastly, by conducting an additional experiment, we confirmed that students’ preference for grading rules in the original survey is not likely to be affected by overconfidence or social bias, nor could it be affected by the type of questionnaires.     

Can gender differences in distributional preferences explain gender gaps in competition?

We design a lab experiment to specifically examine whether a preference for favorable inequality and behindness aversion, as well as egalitarian preferences, affect competitive choices differently among males and females. Using data on approximately 2,000 subjects, we find that selection into competitive environments is negatively related to egalitarian preferences, with smaller negative impacts of being egalitarian on females’ choice to compete. Further, behindness aversion and preference for favorable inequality affect willingness to compete in opposite ways. The willingness to compete is negatively affected by behindness aversion, while a preference for favorable inequality positively influences willingness to compete. Interestingly, when we disaggregate behavior along gender lines, we find that compared to behindness averse males, behindness averse females are more likely to enter the competitive environment. In contrast, there is no significant gender difference in the impact of preference for favorable inequality on competition. Our results suggest that the observed gender difference in competitiveness can stem from male-female differences in distributional preferences and selected personality traits developed during one’s lifetime.     

Does Overconfidence Bias Explain Volatility During the Global Financial Crisis?

This paper explores the problem of the current global financial crisis, using a behavioral perspective. Particularly, the main objective of this paper is to test whether overconfidence bias can explain excessive volatility witnessed during global financial crisis in developed and emerging equity markets. Empirical results of EGARCH estimated models show an asymmetric effect of volatility for all equity market indexes. The relation between excessive trading volume of overconfident investors and excessive prices volatility is then estimated. The results indicate that conditional volatility is positively related to trading volume caused by overconfidence bias. This finding provides strong statistical support to the presence of overconfidence bias among investors in developed and emerging stocks markets. This cognitive bias contributes to the exceptional financial instability that erupted in 2008. However, during the subprime financial crisis period overconfidence bias cannot explain volatility because of the loss of confidence by investors in financial markets.     

Personality Comparisons of College Students Reporting Previous Sexually Transmissible Disease Infection and Students Never Infected

Abstract

This study determined if college students reporting previous sexually transmissible disease infection can be identified as possessing particular personality characteristics. The Cattell Sixteen Personality Factor questionnaire was administered to students in health education classes at seven U.S.A. universities. Students indicated if they had ever contracted an STD through sexual contact outside of marriage. The data were analyzed by the discriminant function analysis. Previously infected females (N = 47) and males (N = 49) were differentiated by personality from their counterparts reporting no previous infection. Six personality factors were the major discriminators between the female groups, with previously infected females being more sober, placid, trusting, affected by feelings, experimenting, and forthright. Five factors differentiated the two male groups, with previously infected males being more tender-minded, assertive, relaxed, practical, and expedient than never infected males. All of the personality factors for the STD groups were within the “average” range for college students. Therefore, the STD groups apparently had no greater psychological difficulties/deviations than other college students. Focusing control efforts on population groups with particular personality characteristics would appear not to be appropriate.     

GENDER DIFFERENCES IN EXAMINATION BEHAVIOR

A unique examination strategy in first‐year microeconomics courses is used to test for gender differences in examination behavior. Students have the possibility of attaining a seminar bonus on the final exam for near‐perfect seminar attendance and are given two voluntary initial quizzes during the semester. At the final exam, the scores received on initial quizzes can either be accepted as is, or students can attempt to improve their marks by answering similar quiz questions on the exam. Results suggest that female students are more likely to take initial quizzes and receive a seminar bonus but are less likely to re‐take quiz questions on the final exam. These results suggest higher risk aversion, less overconfidence, and more self‐discipline or less procrastination among female students relative to male students. Our estimated behavioral differences may have important implications in terms of final grades on the course. (JEL I21, J16, A12, A14)     

Sidedness in Carrying Objects Other than Infants Resembles Sidedness in Infant Cradling: A Two Nation Study of Gender Differences

Studies have repeatedly documented that 60 to 80 % of adults cradle (or carry) infants on the left side of their bodies. However, very little is known about sidedness tendencies when carrying objects in general. The present naturalistic study examines sidedness among college students as they carried books and other “academic” objects on campus. Special attention was given to sidedness biases in the use of a cradling-like carrying style. Over 2,500 observations were made of non-infant object carrying by college students in Malaysia and the United States. In both countries, females used a cradling-like carrying style much more than did males, while males predominantly carried books beside the hip. Regarding sidedness, there were significant left sided biases in the use of a cradling-like style by females in both countries and by males in Malaysia. Other sidedness differences in object carrying were also found. The left sided bias in infant carrying documented in other studies roughly resembles what this study found regarding the carrying of objects bearing no resemblance to infants, especially by females. Theories for left sided biases in infant cradling need to account for why similar biases exist particularly among females when they are carrying inanimate objects.     

On confident men and rational women: It’s all on your mind(set)

We tested the hypothesis that inducing the deliberative and the implemental mindset differently affects judgment and decision making. More specifically, we explored mindset effects on decision makers’ confidence ratings, risk preferences, and susceptibility to anchoring effects. As earlier research on mindsets showed that individual differences sometimes moderate mindset effects, we also tested for interaction effects of mindset and gender. For confidence ratings, we found a main effect of mindset and a main effect of gender. For risk preferences and anchoring effects, mindset interacted with gender. When being in an implemental mindset, the judgments of female decision makers came closer to their actual performance compared to being in a deliberative mindset where they were observed as underconfident. Male decision makers were already overconfident in the deliberative mindset and showed even more overconfidence when being in an implemental mindset. Concerning risk attitudes it was found that female decision makers were more prone to choose the less risky, but also less profitable option (in terms of expected payoffs) when they were in the deliberative compared to the implemental mindset. For men the opposite effects were observed. When investigating anchoring effects, male but not female participants’ judgments were influenced by mindset: In an implemental mindset, male participants followed an irrelevant anchor more strongly (i.e., made more anchor-consistent judgments) compared to being in a deliberative mindset.     

Coming Out in a School Setting

Abstract

The present study was conducted to learn more about the experiences of gay men and lesbians in educational settings, particularly about experiences relevant to disclosure of their sexual orientation. One hundred six gay men and 156 lesbian women responded to an anonymous questionnaire dealing with how their sexual orientation had affected their experiences in school.

As students, very few respondents had chosen to disclose their sexual orientation to principals, teachers, counselors, or friends. Reasons cited for nondisclosure included fear of the consequences and not wanting others to know. The majority of those who did disclose their sexual orientation received positive feedback for doing so, but respondents reported both positive and negative consequences of coming out. Gay men were aware of their sexual orientation at an earlier age than lesbians and were somewhat more likely to recommend disclosure to principals and teachers. Females were more likely to disclose only to females, whereas males were likely to come out to both males and females. Generally, the similarities between males and females were greater than the differences, with both groups being cautious about coming out in the school setting.     

I Am Not a Lucky Person: An Examination of the Dimensionality of Beliefs About Chance

The purpose of this article was to verify whether beliefs about chance are multi or unidimensional constructs. Traditionally, authors who assessed beliefs about chance postulated that individuals who perceive themselves as unlucky usually believe that chance is random and are less confident as well as more anxious. Curiously, it appears that sometimes these individuals act as if they were motivated to avoid negative consequences. In order to better understand these puzzling findings, two studies were performed to compare three instruments intended to assess beliefs about chance and to verify their causal properties. In total, 285 students filled out a battery of instruments, including chance questionnaires (LOC, BIGL and MBIC) and personality traits. Overall, results showed that luck, through perceived controllability, seems to be related to volitional control, whereas chance, which is more stable and less controllable than luck, can be associated with cognitive distortions. The implications of these results are discussed.     

Cancer Knowledge and Examination Frequency in College Students

Abstract

College students are now being considered an appropriate target for cancer education programs. However, research has demonstrated that only a fraction of those individuals knowledgeable about the importance of cancer examinations actually practice these examinations. This study investigated whether the personality construct of repression-sensitization could identify which individuals would or would not practice regular examinations for breast, cervical, and testicular cancer. College students were identified as repressors, neutral, or sensitizers and tested as to their knowledge and examination frequency for breast, cervical, and testicular cancer. After a cancer lecture, this information was reasessed. No differences were found among repressors, neutrals, or sensitizers in cancer knowledge or examination frequency, either prelecture or postlecture. Cancer knowledge significantly increased after the lecture for both males and females. No change was found in the frequency of breast self-examination, while frequency of pap smears declined after the lecture. In contrast, testicular self-examination frequency increased. The implications of these results for future research are discussed.     

Gender Differences in Facial Reactions to Fear-Relevant Stimuli

The aim of the present study was to explore whether females are specifically more facially reactive than males, or whether females are more emotionally reactive in general, as reflected even by non-facial reactions such as autonomic responding and emotional experience. Forty-eight females and 48 males were exposed to pictures of fear-relevant and fear-irrelevant stimuli while EMG activity was detected from the Corrugator supercilii muscle region. Skin conductance responses (SCRs) were measured, and the participants were also required to rate how unpleasant they experienced the stimuli to be. Fear-relevant stimuli evoked a larger corrugator response than fear-irrelevant stimuli, but only for females. Fear-relevant stimuli also elicited larger SCRs and higher ratings of unpleasantness, but these measures were almost identical for females and males. The present results are consistent with the hypothesis that females are more facially reactive than males, but not more reactive in other respects.     

Not all luck is created equal: Sources of income inequality and willingness to redistribute

Despite steadily rising inequality in the US over the last few decades, demand for increasing tax rates and redistribution has not increased. A growing literature argues that one reason for this is that people might perceive inequality to be fair. This literature has documented that Americans tend to perceive economic inequality stemming from merit as being fair and inequality stemming from luck as unfair. However, “lucky breaks” in the real world do not necessarily come from a lottery or random chance but from the actions of the government favoring a “lucky” few. People might be more willing to redistribute if it compensates those negatively affected by government action. Using an online experiment we show that luck stemming from the action of a government-like actor influences individuals’ desire to redistribute earnings making them more likely to favor redistribution than in instances where inequality is caused by merit or by random luck.