17
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Gender Differences in Performance Predictions: Evidence from the Cognitive Reflection Test

      research-article

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          This paper studies performance predictions in the 7-item Cognitive Reflection Test (CRT) and whether they differ by gender. After participants completed the CRT, they predicted their own (i), the other participants’ (ii), men’s (iii), and women’s (iv) number of correct answers. In keeping with existing literature, men scored higher on the CRT than women and both men and women were too optimistic about their own performance. When we compare gender-specific predictions, we observe that men think they perform significantly better than other men and do so significantly more than women. The equality between women’s predictions about their own performance and their female peers cannot be rejected. Our findings contribute to the growing literature on the underpinnings of behavior in economics and in psychology by uncovering gender differences in confidence about one’s ability relative to same and opposite sex peers.

          Related collections

          Most cited references25

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: not found
          • Article: not found

          Boys will be Boys: Gender, Overconfidence, and Common Stock Investment

            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: not found
            • Article: not found

            CEO Overconfidence and Corporate Investment

              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              The trouble with overconfidence.

              The authors present a reconciliation of 3 distinct ways in which the research literature has defined overconfidence: (a) overestimation of one's actual performance, (b) overplacement of one's performance relative to others, and (c) excessive precision in one's beliefs. Experimental evidence shows that reversals of the first 2 (apparent underconfidence), when they occur, tend to be on different types of tasks. On difficult tasks, people overestimate their actual performances but also mistakenly believe that they are worse than others; on easy tasks, people underestimate their actual performances but mistakenly believe they are better than others. The authors offer a straightforward theory that can explain these inconsistencies. Overprecision appears to be more persistent than either of the other 2 types of overconfidence, but its presence reduces the magnitude of both overestimation and overplacement.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Contributors
                Journal
                Front Psychol
                Front Psychol
                Front. Psychol.
                Frontiers in Psychology
                Frontiers Media S.A.
                1664-1078
                01 November 2016
                2016
                : 7
                : 1680
                Affiliations
                [1] 1Social and Behavioral Approaches to Global Problems, Kiel Institute for the World Economy Kiel, Germany
                [2] 2Medical Sciences Division, Department of Experimental Psychology, University of Oxford Oxford, UK
                [3] 3Department of Economics, University of Kiel Kiel, Germany
                [4] 4Department of Economics and Econometrics, University of Johannesburg Johannesburg, South Africa
                Author notes

                Edited by: Nikolaos Georgantzis, University of Reading, UK

                Reviewed by: Marcello Sartarelli, University of Alicante, Spain; Zahra Murad, University of Surrey, UK

                *Correspondence: Levent Neyse, levent.neyse@ 123456ifw-kiel.de

                This article was submitted to Personality and Social Psychology, a section of the journal Frontiers in Psychology

                Article
                10.3389/fpsyg.2016.01680
                5089055
                27847487
                81967ad7-d62b-42f3-b9bb-79190a0cc314
                Copyright © 2016 Ring, Neyse, David-Barett and Schmidt.

                This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) or licensor are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.

                History
                : 30 June 2016
                : 13 October 2016
                Page count
                Figures: 2, Tables: 2, Equations: 0, References: 48, Pages: 7, Words: 0
                Categories
                Psychology
                Original Research

                Clinical Psychology & Psychiatry
                overconfidence,cognitive reflection test,gender difference,performance prediction,competition,intra-gender competition

                Comments

                Comment on this article