Universidad de Montevideo, Facultad de Ciencias Empresariales y Economía, Departamento de Economía
Date
2011
Extensión
28 p.
Abstract
It is common for a majority of people to rank themselves as better than average on simple tasks and worse than average on difficult tasks. The literature takes for granted that this apparent misconfidence is problematic. We argue, however, that this behaviour is consistent with purely rational Bayesian updaters. In fact, better-than average data by itself cannot be used to show overconfidence; we indicate which type
of data can be used. Our theory is consistent with empirical patterns found in the literature.