Related Experiment Video
Updated: Aug 7, 2026

Combining Behavioral Endocrinology and Experimental Economics: Testosterone and Social Decision Making
Published on: March 2, 2011
Should observed overconfidence be dismissed as a statistical artifact? Critique of Erev, Wallsten, and Budescu (1994)
1Warrington College of Business Administration, University of Florida, USA. lyle@rice.edu
Abstract:
I. Erev, T. S. Wallsten, and D. V. Budescu (1994) showed that the same probability judgment data can reveal both apparent overconfidence and underconfidence, depending on how the data are analyzed. To explain this seeming paradox, I. Erev et al. proposed a general model of judgment in which overt responses are related to underlying "true judgments" that are perturbed by error. A central conclusion of their work is that observed over- and underconfidence can be split into two components: (a) "true" over- and underconfidence and (b) "artifactual" over- and underconfidence due to error in judgment. It is argued in the present article that decomposing over- and underconfidence into true and artifactual components is inappropriate. The mistake stems from giving primacy to ambiguously defined model constructions (true judgments) over observed data.
More Related Videos
08:12A Psychophysics Paradigm for the Collection and Analysis of Similarity Judgments
Published on: March 1, 2022
10:55Enhancing an Avian Sound Recognition Model's Detection Precision via Logistic Regression of Large Acoustic Datasets: A Case Study of the European Robin (Erithacus rubecula)
Published on: April 11, 2026
Related Concept Videos
Cause and Effect
The Representativeness Heuristic
Hindsight Biases
Unrealistic Optimism Bias
Actor-Observer Effect
Halo Effect