People are overly confident in their own knowledge, despite errors

June 10, 2013

Overprecision—excessive confidence in the accuracy of our beliefs—can have profound consequences, inflating investors' valuation of their investments, leading physicians to gravitate too quickly to a diagnosis, even making people intolerant of dissenting views. Now, new research confirms that overprecision is a common and robust form of overconfidence driven, at least in part, by excessive certainty in the accuracy of our judgments.

The research, conducted by researchers Albert Mannes of The Wharton School of the University of Pennsylvania and Don Moore of the Haas School of Business at the University of California, Berkeley, revealed that the more confident participants were about their estimates of an uncertain quantity, the less they adjusted their estimates in response to feedback about their accuracy and to the costs of being wrong.

"The findings suggest that people are too confident in what they know and underestimate what they don't know," says Mannes.

The new findings are published in Psychological Science, a journal of the Association for .

Research investigating overprecision typically involves asking people to come up with a 90% confidence interval around a numerical estimate—such as the length of the Nile River—but this doesn't always faithfully reflect the we have to make in everyday life. We know, for example, that arriving 15 minutes late for a business meeting is not the same as arriving 15 minutes early, and that we ought to err on the side of arriving early.

Mannes and Moore designed three studies to account for the asymmetric nature of many everyday judgments. Participants estimated the local high temperature on randomly selected days and their accuracy was rewarded in the form of lottery tickets toward a prize. For some trials, they earned tickets if their estimates were correct or close to the actual temperature (above or below); in other trials, they earned tickets for correct guesses or overestimates; and in some trials they earned tickets for correct guesses or underestimates.

The results showed that participants adjusted their estimates in the direction of the anticipated payoff after receiving feedback about their accuracy, just as Mannes and Moore expected.

But they didn't adjust their estimates as much as they should have given their actual knowledge of local temperatures, suggesting that they were overly confident in their own powers of estimation.

Only when the researchers provided exaggerated feedback—in which errors were inflated by 2.5 times—were the researchers able to counteract participants' tendency towards overprecision.

The new findings, which show that overprecision is a common and robust phenomenon, urge caution:

"People frequently cut things too close—arriving late, missing planes, bouncing checks, or falling off one of the many 'cliffs' that present themselves in daily life," observe Mannes and Moore.

"These studies tell us that you shouldn't be too certain about what's going to happen, especially when being wrong could be dangerous. You should plan to protect yourself in case you aren't as right as you think you are."

Explore further: Two heads are not always better than one

Related Stories

Two heads are not always better than one

March 6, 2012
(Medical Xpress) -- From the corporate boardroom to the kitchen table, important decisions are often made in collaboration. But are two—or three or five—heads better than one? Not always, according to new research ...

When deciding how to bet, less detailed information may be better

May 13, 2013
People are worse at predicting whether a sports team will win, lose, or tie when they bet on the final score than when they bet on the overall outcome, according to a new study published in Psychological Science, a journal ...

Overinterpretation common in diagnostic accuracy studies

May 15, 2013
(HealthDay)—Roughly three in 10 diagnostic accuracy studies published in journals with impact factors of four or higher have overinterpretation, according to a review published in the May issue of Radiology.

Distance makes a difference in eyewitness identification

April 10, 2013
University of Adelaide researchers are studying the reliability of eyewitness identification testimony in criminal cases in the hopes of improving evidence from witnesses and leading to fairer trials.

Recommended for you

Study finds gene variant increases risk for depression

July 20, 2017
A University of Central Florida study has found that a gene variant, thought to be carried by nearly 25 percent of the population, increases the odds of developing depression.

In making decisions, are you an ant or a grasshopper?

July 20, 2017
In one of Aesop's famous fables, we are introduced to the grasshopper and the ant, whose decisions about how to spend their time affect their lives and future. The jovial grasshopper has a blast all summer singing and playing, ...

Study examines effects of stopping psychiatric medication

July 20, 2017
Despite numerous obstacles and severe withdrawal effects, long-term users of psychiatric drugs can stop taking them if they choose, and mental health care professionals could be more helpful to such individuals, according ...

Perceiving oneself as less physically active than peers is linked to a shorter lifespan

July 20, 2017
Would you say that you are physically more active, less active, or about equally active as other people your age?

New study suggests that reduced insurance coverage for mental health treatment increases costs for the seriously ill

July 19, 2017
Higher out-of-pocket costs for mental health care could have the unintended consequence of increasing the use of acute and involuntary mental health care among those suffering from the most debilitating disorders, a Harvard ...

Old antibiotic could form new depression treatment

July 19, 2017
An antibiotic used mostly to treat acne has been found to improve the quality of life for people with major depression, in a world-first clinical trial conducted at Deakin University.

2 comments

Adjust slider to filter visible comments by rank

Display comments: newest first

knowledgeispower19
3.7 / 5 (3) Jun 10, 2013
This research illustrates a common shortcoming amongst Republicans. Interesting.
cyberCMDR
5 / 5 (2) Jun 10, 2013
Another term for the Dunning-Kruger effect.

Please sign in to add a comment. Registration is free, and takes less than a minute. Read more

Click here to reset your password.
Sign in to get notified via email when new comments are made.