Seminars Series

22/11/2019 12:45 - 14:00

Prof. Paul Smeets (Maastricht University) will present:

Why do the rich oppose redistribution? An experiment with America’s top 5%

BELSS Seminar

Where: 4-E4-SR03

Abstract: Wealthy individuals have a disproportionate influence on politics and firms. We study attitudes toward redistribution of a large sample of the top 5% in the U.S. in terms of income and financial assets, and find that they prefer less redistribution than a representative sample of the bottom 95%. The differences in tax attitudes and political views can be largely attributed to differences in distributional preferences, which we measured in an experiment where choices affected the pay of workers in a real-effort task. Wealthy Americans redistribute less to the low-income worker, thus accepting more inequality than the rest of the population. The gap in distributional preferences is primarily driven by individuals who  acquired wealth over their lifetime rather than those who were born into wealth. Our findings raise the possibility that wealthy individuals contribute to the persistent income inequality in the U.S.

______________________________________________________________

06/11/2019 17:30 - 19:00

Prof. Quentin André (Rotterdam School of Management) will present:

Slop(p)y Inferences: Upward Trends Foster an Illusion of Learning and Control

BELSS Seminar

Where: 4-E4-SR03

Abstract: We investigate how the outcome bias (people’s tendency to infer the quality of a decision from its outcome) can favor illusory correlations. To do so, we use a simulation in which respondents make repeated investment decisions, and try to learn the characteristics that predict a higher payoff. Unbeknownst to them, the payoffs are independent of their choices. Instead, we manipulate the payoffs so that they increase (vs. stay flat vs. decrease) over time. This manipulation exerts a significant impact on people’s sense of learning, confirming that upward trends can make people overconfident in their ability to control their environment.

______________________________________________________________

16/09/2019 17:00 - 18:00

Prof. Noah LIM (Director, Global Asia Institute, NUS Business School) will present:

Examining Salesperson Effort Allocation in Teams: A Randomized Field Experiment

BELSS Seminar

Where: 4-E4-SR03

Abstract: When salespeople with heterogeneous sales abilities are assigned into teams, how do they adjust effort as the abilities of their coworkers change? We investigate this question using a field experiment that spans 29 retail booths and 116 salespeople at a major department store in China. Each booth compensates salespeople using either an individual-based commission (IB) or a revenue-sharing (RS) incentive and employs four salespeople, with two salespeople per shift. Our field experiment randomly assigns salespeople to work shifts, thus exogenously varying the ability of a salesperson’s coworker. The results show that under the IB incentive, the lower-ability salesperson will strategically decrease effort as the ability of the coworker rises; correspondingly, the higher-ability salesperson reduces effort as the coworker’s ability decreases. In contrast, under the RS incentive, the sales pattern suggests that the lower-ability (higher-ability) salesperson increases effort when the coworker’s ability increases (decreases). These empirical results provide broad support to our theory that accounts for the effect of social preferences on salespeople’s effort decisions. We also examine the revenue implications of team composition on firm performance under different sales incentives.

______________________________________________________________

02/04/2019 17:00 - 18:00

Prof. Paolo Pin (Bocconi University) will present:

AppLab: the advantage of conducting online experiments in behavioral economics

BELSS Seminar

Where: 4-E4-SR03

Abstract: I have programmed an app for running online behavioral experiments (a description is at: https://applabresearch.com/, where the app can also be downloaded and tested). This tool is extremely useful for several reasons. The main ones for me are that:

(1) I can replicate network games played on large networks, having full control of the communication between subjects, checking with large and complex environments the prediction of models in network economics;

(2) I can replicate for subjects the experience of real online social networks, which have a huge impact on many sociological and economic aspects of our daily lives;

(3) I can run experiments that last for days, addressing for example issues of intertemporal discounting that would not be possible to check in the limited time of a lab experiment;

(4) finally, I can address issues of external validity, running experiments with a population of subjects that are not university students, and that would not have time to come to a behavioral lab.

My project is also based on some preliminary experiments that test the validity of online experiments with respect to classical experiments in the lab. Then, I will run experiments for each of the 4 issues stated above, studying the outcomes with the help of theoretical models that I will develop.

______________________________________________________________

15/03/2019 12.45 - 14:15

Prof. G. Loewenstein (Carnegie Mellon University) will present:

Thanking, Apologizing, Bragging, and Blaming: The Currency of Communication

BELSS Seminar

Where: N12

Abstract: We propose a theory that draws connections between four forms of communication that have not previously been connected: thanking, apologizing, bragging, and blaming. All four forms of communication relay information about credit or blame for a positive or negative outcome, and thus introduce image-based costs and benefits for both the communicator and the recipient of communication. Specifically, each of the four communications involves a tradeoff on two important dimensions of interpersonal judgment: competence and warmth. He use the model to make sense of why these forms of communication are so important for relationships (e.g., why the failure to thank or apologize can lead to the dissolution of relationships) and to generate novel predictions that we test in a series of experiments.

______________________________________________________________

18/12/2018 17.00

Prof. Eugenio Proto (University of Bristol) will present:

How Intelligent players teach cooperation

BELSS Seminar

Where: 4-E4-Sr03

Abstract: We study cooperation rates in a repeated Prisoner’s Dilemma game (RPDG), focusing on whether and how Intelligence affects change over time of the rate. In Proto et al (2109) we established that players of higher intelligence have a higher cooperation rate than otherwise similar players of lower intelligence, when players interact in two separate groups (split treatment). Here we study how cooperation rates change over time in mixed groups, where players are not informed of the intelligence level of the others. We test the hypothesis that higher Intelligence players operate as leaders and increase the cooperation rate of the lower Intelligence players. The first main finding is that the cooperation rates in the combined treatment (mixing high and low IQ subjects) is at an intermediate level between those of the two groups in the split treatment, substantially higher than the rate of the lower intelligence players (with a Raven Score-based IQ of 76-106), and with a small loss for the high Intelligence players (with a Raven Score-based IQ of 102-127), when we compare them to the split treatment. We analyze what is the path of the effect, in other words, how do the higher Intelligence players ``teach’’ the others to cooperate.

___________________________________________________________

14/05/2018 12:30-1:45 pm

Alex Imas (Carnegie Mellon University) will present: 

The Dynamics of Discrimination

BELSS seminar jointly with Economics - Applied Microeconomics Seminar

Where: 5-E4-SR04

Authors: Aislinn Bohren (University of Pennsylvania) , Alex Imas (Carnegie Mellon University), Michael Rosenberg (University of Pennsylvania).

Abstract: We model the dynamics of discrimination and show how its evolution can identify the underlying cause. We test these theoretical predictions in a field experiment on a large online platform where users post content that is evaluated by other users on the platform. We assign posts to accounts that exogenously vary by gender and history of evaluations. With no prior evaluations, women face signicant discrimination, while following a sequence of positive evaluations, the direction of discrimination reverses: posts by women are favored over those by men. According to our theoretical predictions, this dynamic reversal implies discrimination driven by biased beliefs.

________________________________________________________________

23/03/2018 12:45

Gary Charness (University of California Santa Barbara) will present: 

Biases Over Information Structures: Confirmation, Contradiction and Certainty Seeking Behavior in the Laboratory

BELSS seminar jointly with Economics and Decision Sciences Dept.

Where: 3-E403

Authors: Gary Charness, Ryan Oprea, Sevgi Yuksel (University of California Santa Barbara)

Abstract: Our results suggest that favoritism is not considered good practice in our context, but rather derives from psychological barriers to easily implement fair procedures absent external randomizati We study choices among information structure that are characterized by different biases. Bias is introduced via either distortion, through possibility of fals reports as in cheap talk games of Crawford and Sobel (1982), or via filtering, through possibility of strategic omission of information as in disclosure games of Milgrom and Roberts (1986). The experimental design exploits how the optimal information structure depends on ones prior and the form of the bias-filtering or distrotion. Typing subjects based on their choices ina  series of questions spanning these cases, we need strong evidence for confirmation, contradiction and certainty seeking behaviour. This is particularly suprising given that traditional explanations for confirmation or contradiction seeking behaviour are shut down in our desing. Finally, we do not observe bias in choices over information structures to be correlated with biases in how signals are later intepreted. We discuss implications of our results in the context of political information and the role of media bias.

____________________________________________________________

15/03/2018 18:00-19:00

Title: Round it up: Preferences Exists for Rounded Totals (PERT)

Authors: Varun Sharma (Bocconi University), Zachary Estes (Bocconi University), Aradhna Krishna (University of Michigan)

Where: 4 E4 SR03  

___________________________________________________________________

01/03/2018 18:00-19:00

Title: We Don't Know What We Don't Know: When and How the Use of Twitter's Public APIs Biases Scientific Inference

Authors:Rebekah Tromble,  Andreas Storz and Daniela Stockmann (Leiden University - Department of Political Science) 

Where: 4 E4 SR03  

Abstract. Though Twitter research has proliferated, no standards for data collection have crystallized. When using keyword queries, the most common data sources—the Search and Streaming APIs—rarely return the full population of tweets, and scholars do not know whether their data constitute a representative sample. This paper seeks to provide the most comprehensive look to-date at the potential biases that may result. Employing data derived from four identical keyword queries to the Firehose (which provides the full population of tweets but is cost-prohibitive), Streaming, and Search APIs, we use Kendall’s-tau and logit regression analyses to understand the differences in the datasets, including what user and content characteristics make a tweet more or less likely to appear in sampled results. We find that there are indeed systematic differences that are likely to bias scholars’ findings in almost all datasets we examine, and we recommend significant caution in future Twitter research.

_________________________________________________________________________

Working Paper Presentation

22/02/2018 17:00-18:00

Title: Divergence between Hypothetical and Consequential Dependent Measures 

Authors: Ioannis Evangelidis (Bocconi University), Deb Small (Wharton, University of Pennsylvania), 

Jonathan Levav (Stanford Graduate School of Business)

Where: 4 E4 SR03  

Abstract. In this paper, we empirically assess discrepancies resulting from the use of real versus hypothetical dependent measures in studies of human behavior. We focus on two behaviors: donations and decision-making under risk. In four well-powered studies (total N = 3,218), we present participants with identical stimuli and ask them to respond to either hypothetical or consequential measures. We observe two empirical regularities. First, we find that the dependent measure has a systematic effect on the behavior that it intends to measure. Participants are more likely to donate and more likely to assume risk when the dependent measure is hypothetical compared to real. Second, we find a contingency between the decision context and the dependent measure in the context of donation behavior but not in the context of risky decisions. Changes in the decision context—in particular introducing new choice alternatives—are likely to produce divergent effects in hypothetical versus real measures of donation—but not of risky—behavior. We conclude with a discussion about the implications of our results for behavioral researchers.

_______________________________________________________________________

Working Paper Presentation 

23/11/2017 17:00-18:00

Title: Gender Gaps in Math Tests: Women under Pressure

Authors: Vincenzo Galasso (Bocconi University, Dondena, IGIER and CEPR), Paola Profeta (Bocconi University, Dondena)

Where: 4 E4 SR03  

Abstract: Gender gaps exist in math tests, particularly among high performing students. What are the determinants of this gap? In this paper, we want to investigate the role of time pressure. This is an important and policy-relevant channel, since all math tests in which gender gaps emerge (SAT, GRE, PISA, entry tests for college or business schools) are performed under tight time constraints. To explore this channel, we run a lab experiment with 287 Italian undergraduate and Master students at Bocconi University. Given our subject pool, we expect large gender differences, since gender gaps in math are large in Italy and among high performers. In our experiment, each student performs four incentivized tests: a test of attentiveness, a working memory test, a math test under no time pressure and a math test under (low or high) time pressure. We find that a gender gap emerges even in untimed math test: on average male students provide half (out of 10) more correct answers than females and the ratio of male to female top performers (i.e., students with all correct answers) is 1.8. The gender gap increases under low pressure: on average male students have one more correct answers than females and the ratio of male to female top performers is 2.4. The gender gap increases even further under high pressure: while both males and females perform worse under pressure, on average male students provide 1.25 more correct answers than females. Moreover, the ratio of male to female top performers jumps to 4. These results suggest that half of the gender gap observed in math tests performed under tight time constraints can be accounted for by a different gender response to time pressure.

____________________________________________________________

14/12/2017 17:00

S.Trautman (University of Heidelberg) will present

Implementing Fair Procedures?

BELSS seminar

Where: 4 E4-SR03

Authors: Stefan Trautmann, Heidelberg Univeristy & Tilburg University (with Robert Schmidt, Heidelberg University)

Abstract. We experimentally study situations in which a decision maker allocates resources to two agents. The allocation will be unequal, but the allocation procedure may be fair. However, procedural fairness might be violated by favoritism. This feature is common in many practical settings, including corporate governance and human resource settings. We study the perception of procedural and outcome fairness in this setting, and the reaction to different allocation procedures by the decision maker and the affected agents.We find a strong degree of favoritism in our baseline conditions. We subsequently consider four interventions aimed at reducing the degree of favoritism. Our results show that favoritism can successfully be reduced by some of these interventions. Our results suggest that favoritism is not considered good practice in our context, but rather derives from psychological barriers to easily implement fair procedures absent external randomization tools.   

_______________________________________________

15/11/2017 12:30

B.Tungodden (Norwegian School of Economics and Business Administration) will present

Beliefs about Behavioral Responses to Taxation

BELSS seminar

Where: 5-SR03

Abstract. Behavioral responses to taxation affect the trade-off society faces between implementing equality and efficiency. Several influential theoretical papers have used heterogeneity in beliefs about behavioral responses to taxation to explain variation in people's support fro redistribuition of income in society. In this study, we use a purposefully simple task to elicit incentivized beliefs from a representative sample of the US population about how taxes affect people's effort choices. The design allows us to assess the empirical validity of theoretical models suggesting a key role for beliefs about behavioral responses by investigating whether these beliefs are good predictor of people's support for redistributive policies. We find that while equality--efficiency preferences strongly predict individual support for redistributive policies in society, beliefs about behavioral responses are not a significat predictor of support for redistributive policies. The findings suggest that preference heterogeneity is more important than differences in beliefs to explain people's attitudes toward redistribuition of income in society.

____________________________________________________________________________________

12/06/2017 17:00

S. Puntoni (Erasmus University Rotterdam) will present
Automation and Identity

BELSS seminar

Where: 4-E4-SR03

Abstract.  Automation  is transforming many consumption domains, including everyday activities like cooking or driving, and recreational sctivities like fishing or playing music. Yet, surprisingly little research in marketing has examined consumer preferences for automated products. Automation often provides obvious consumption benefits, but seven studies spanning a variety of product categories show that automation may not be desirable when identity motives are important drivers for consumption. Using both correlational and experimental designs, the findings demonstrate that individuals who strongly identify with a particular social category resist automated features when these features hinder the attribution of identity-relevant consumption outcomes to oneself. We also show that people use the presence of automation as a cue to infer both consumers' motivations for their behaviors and the identity-centrality of the automated task. These findings have substantial theoretical implications for research on identity and on technology, as well as managerial implications for targeting, product innovation, and communication. 

27/06/2017 17:00

F.G.M. Pieters (Tilburg University) will present

Meaningful Mediation: Strengthening the Weakest Links

BELSS seminar

Where: 4-E4-SR03

Abstract. Statistical mediation analysis has become the technique of choice in consumer behavior research to make causal inferences about the influence that a treatment has on an outcome via one or more mediators. The current study aims to strengthen two weak links that impede statistical mediation analysis from reaching its full potential. The first weak link is the path from mediator to outcome, which is correlation. Six conditions are described that this correlation needs to meet in order to make plausible causal inferences: directionality, reliability, unconfoundedness, distinctiveness, power, and mediation. Current consumer behavior research mostly examines the final condition only. Causal inferences from mediation analysis become more plausible when all conditions are met. The study offers recommendations to achieve this. It introduces Sweetspot analysis to establish whether an observed mediator-outcome correlation falls within the range of meaningful correlations. The second weak link is the communication of mediation results. More comprehensively communicating results than is currently the case can improve knowledge accumulation about the causal processes of interest. Four components of comprehensive communication of mediation analysis results are described: effect decomposition, effect size, difference testing, and data sharing. The study offers recommendations for improvement. A review of 166 recently published mediation analyses in the Journal of Consumer Research, a re-analysis of two published datasets, and Monte Carlo simulations support the analysis and recommendations.

______________________________________________________________________________________

09/05/2017 17:00

P. Ayton (University of London) will present:

Deal or No Deal, Terrorism and Bicycle Accidents: Effects of Emotions on Risky Decisions and Vice Versa

BELSS seminar

Where: Room N23 (2nd floor in the Velodromo building)

Abstract. Psychologists' experiments have the virtue of affording the study of behavior under controlled conditions. However some criticize laboratory studies of decision making for their artifice and doubt that demonstrations of irrational decisions would occur outside the laboratory - e.g. when people make real choices involving significant payoffs. I discuss two, non-laboratory studies investigating how emotions influence decisions with significant consequences and vice versa. One study analyses the effects of terrorist attack on pleople's transport decisions. It appears that, in attempting to avoid dreaded risks, people subject themselves to larger, albeit non-dread, risks. A second study analyses how contestants in the TV game show "Deal or No Deal" react to the outcomes of the decisions they make. Specifically their happiness is affected by the amounts of money they win - but also by the amounts of money they discover they could have won if only they had chosen differently. Both studies show effects incompatible with strictly rational perspective on decision making.

30/03/2017 17:00

Judd Benjamin Kessler (The Wharton School at the University of Pennsylvania) will present

Thinking Fast and Slow: Generosity Over Time

BELSS seminar

Where: Room N26 (2nd floor in the Velodromo building)

Abstract. Do individuals experience internal conflicts when deciding whether to be generous? In this project, we bring a new experimental method to the ongoing debate about whether a dual-self model is appropriate for describing generous behavior. Our design allows us to observe both (early) intuitive and (later) deliberate choices of the same individual and to see if these choices differ. We find that rather than being intuitively selfish or intuitively generous, individuals become more selfish or more generous over time as a function of the efficiency of the generous act available. This result suggests that dual-self models with one selfish and one generous self are not appropriate for explaining generosity, but a dual-self model with one self that cares about social efficiency might be more appropriate. Our results question the use of revealed preference for welfare in the charitable domain and provide guidance to charities and policy makers.

Coauthors: Hannu Kivimaki, Muriel Niederle

18/10/2016 17:30

Martin Dufwenberg (University of Arizona) will present:

King of The Hill: Giving Backward Induction its Best Shot

BELSS seminar

Where: 3-E4-SR03 (3rd floor in the Via Roentgen building)

Abstract. We study a class of deceptively similar games, which however have different player sets and predictions that vary with their cardinality. The economic, biological, political, and psychological applications are many. The game-theoretic principles involved are compelling as predictions rely on weaker and less controversial epistemic foundations than needed to justify backward inductions more generally. Is the account empirically relevant? We design and report results from a relevant experiment.

13/09/2016 12:45

Rebecca Morton (New York University) will present:

The Price of Religion: Experiments in Willingness to Bear Risks For Others in Islamic COmmunities

BELSS seminar jointly with Dondena (Political Economy Unit)

Where: 3-E4-SR03 (3rd floor in the Via Roentgen building)

Abstract. In this paper we investigate the effects of religion and religiosity on prosocial actions that involve bearing risks for others (joining a social movement, funding a project with an uncertain uotcome). In particular, we focus on the effect of the Islamic prohibition against lending with interest on the choice of Muslims to lend through a profit sharing arrangement (PLS) that protects borrowers against bankruptcy instead of using westernized interest based financing (IB). We report on an incentivized experiment that resembles the choice between IB and PLS to analyze how a direct quote from Qur'an on the prohibition affects choices of Muslims in three extremely different countries (Indonesia, China, and UAE). Interestingly, the religious frame has little effect on the choice of PLS when the alternative is charging low interest rates, but has a large positive effect when the alternative is charging high interest rates. These results suggest the limits of the influence of religious framing: it is only particularly effective in encouraging individuals to bear risk for others when the choice between self interest and others' well-being in stark.

17/05/2016 12:30

James Andreoni (University of California, San Diego) will present:

t.b.a.

BELSS seminar jointly with Economics Dept.

Where: 3-E4-SR03 (3rd floor in the Via Roentgen building)

20/04/2016 12:45-14:00

Uri Simonsohn (The Wharton School, University of Pennsylvania) will present

Specification Curve: Descriptive and Inferential Statistics on All Reasonable Specifications

BELSS seminar jointly with Marketing Dept.

Where: Room 4-E4-SR03 (4th floor in the Via Roentgen building)

Abstract. Empirical results often hinge on data analytic decisions that are simultaneously defensible, arbitrary, and motivated. To mitigate this problem we introduce Specification-Curve Analysis, which consists of three steps: (i) identifying the set of theoretically justified, statistically valid, and non-redundant analytic specifications, (ii) displaying alternative results graphically, allowing the identification of decisions producing different results, and (iii) conducting statistical tests to determine whether as a whole results are inconsistent with the null hypothesis. We illustrate its use by applying it to three published findings. One proves robust, one weak, one not robust at all.

09/12/2015 17:30-18:20

Adam Sanjurjo (Alicante) will present

Search with Multiple Attributes: Theory and Empirics

Where: Room 3-E4-SR03 (3rd floor seminar room in the Via Roentgen building)

Abstract. Multiple attribute search is a central feature of economic life: We consider much more than price when purchasing a home, and more than wage when choosing a job. Nevertheless, while single attribute search problems have been studied extensively, little is known about optimal search in multiple attribute environments. This paper provides the first partial characterization of optimal sequential search in a problem with multiple searchable attributes and alternatives, full recall, and no order restrictions on search. When the partial optimal benchmark is applied to a uniquely rich dataset subjects are found to systematically deviate from optimal search by (1) searching too deeply within alternatives and (2) switching too adjacently between alternatives, which results in considerable economic losses. Existing behavioral models cannot explain these patterns of behavior.

25/11/2015 17:30-18:20

David Gill (Oxford) will present:

Cognitive Ability, Character Skills, and Learning to Play Equilibrium: A Level-K Analysis

Where: Room 3-E4-SR03 (3rd floor seminar room in the Via Roentgen building)

Abstract. .In this paper we investigate how cognitive ability and character skills influence behavior, success and the evolution of play towards Nash equilibrium in repeated strategic interactions. We study behavior in a p-beauty contest experiment and find striking differences according to cognitive ability: more cognitively able subjects choose numbers closer to equilibrium, converge more frequently to equilibrium play and earn more even as behavior approaches the equilibrium prediction. To understand better how subjects with different cognitive abilities learn differently, we estimate a structural model of learning based on level-k reasoning. We find a systematic positive relationship between cognitive ability and levels; furthermore, the average level of more cognitively able subjects responds positively to the cognitive ability of their opponents, while the average level of less cognitively able subjects does not respond. Finally, we compare the influence of cognitive ability to that of character skills, and find that both cognition and personality affect behavior and learning. More agreeable and emotionally stable subjects perform better and learn faster, although the effect of cognitive ability on behavior is stronger than that of character skills.

12/11/2015 17:30-18:20

Sigrid Suetens (Tilburg) will present:

Reciprocity in a Diverse Society

Where: Room 3-E4-SR03 (3rd floor seminar room in the Via Roentgen building)

Abstract. .Reciprocity is key for successful economic and social interactions in a society. To understand how today's Western societies work, it is important to understand reciprocity among individuals with different ethnic and cultural backgrounds. We study whether reciprocation in a representative sample of individuals living in the Netherlands, and belonging to the native majority group, depends on whether the interaction partner is native as well, or is, instead, non-native. Individuals in the sample play simple, incentivized trust games with an anonymous other in the sample, whose first name was (truthfully) communicated. We find that trustees reciprocate trust of non-native trustors up to 7% less than that of native trustors. Given that the decision to reciprocate does not involve any risk or uncertainty, we take our results as evidence of taste-based discrimination

05/11/2015 17:30-18:20

Oege Dijk (Radboud University), (j/w Steven Malliaris and Michaela Pagel) will present:

Hot or Not? Mutual Fund Fees with Endogenous Exit and Competition

Where: Room 3-E4-SR03 (3rd floor seminar room in the Via Roentgen building)

Abstract. The main unresolved issue in the mutual fund literature is the fact that funds charge high fees even though most of them underperform and experts have advised against investing with them for decades. People may be willing to pay high fees if they suffer from misinference about mutual fund performance and chase funds that are overperforming simply because they were lucky or the mutual fund company systematically closes underperforming funds. To better understand fund fees, we run a market experiment in which managers set fees and investors accept or decline after they were randomly matched in each of multiple rounds. In each round, managers can also decide whether or not to delete their history. Finally, we test whether the results hold up under competition. Even though risk averse investors should never invest, high fees are prevalent throughout all treatments.

29/10/2015 17:30-18:20

Joshua Miller (Bocconi), will present:

The Hot Hand Fallacy: A Truth in the Law of Small Number

Where: Room 3-E4-SR03 (3rd floor seminar room in the Via Roentgen building)

Abstract. We find a subtle but substantial bias in a standard measure of the conditional dependence of present outcomes on streaks of past outcomes in sequential data. The mechanism is a form of selection bias, which leads the empirical probability (i.e. relative frequency) to underestimate the true probability of a given outcome, when conditioning on prior outcomes of the same kind. The biased measure has been used prominently in the literature that investigates incorrect beliefs in sequential decision making¾most notably the Hot Hand Fallacy. Upon correcting for the bias, the conclusions of some prominent studies in the literature are reversed. The bias also provides a structural explanation of why the belief in the law of small numbers persists, as repeated experience with finite sequences can only reinforce these beliefs, on average.

06/06/2015 09:50-13:00

BELSS Symposium on Experimental Economics

with  four invited speakers + a shorter bonus talk: Olivier Armantier (NY Fed), Giuseppe Attanasi (Strasbourg), Haileselassie Medhin (Gothenburg), Giovanni Ponti (LUISS & Alicante) + Joshua Miller (Bocconi). 
Topics: click here
Where: Room 3-E4-SR03 (3rd floor seminar room in the Via Roentgen building)
When: Saturday June 6 at 09.50-13.00
Afterwards: light lunch will be served

06/05/2015 17:30-18:20+
Gideon Nave (Caltech) will talk about
Dynamic unstructured bargaining with private information and deadlines: theory and experiment
[joint work with Colin F. Camerer & Alec Smith]
Inside BELSS -- our experimental lab on the 3rd floor of the Roentgen building
Afterwards we all go for a post-seminar off-campus aperitivo

29/04/2015 17:30-18:20+
A BELSS-Legal Studies dept. seminar
Christian Dahlman, Professor in Jurisprudence at Lund University will present 
Miss Rate Neglect in Legal Decision Making (abstract below).
Inside BELSS -- our experimental lab on the 3rd floor of the Roentgen building
Afterwards we all go for a post-seminar off-campus aperitivo

This will be the first ever BELSS event on experimental law and we hope many will attend.

Abstract: A decision maker who does not take proper account of the probability that a certain piece of evidence is a false positive, P(E|-H), commits an error that can be called miss rate neglect. This is a common error in legal decision making. There are many examples from legal cases where judges or juries have assessed evidence incorrectly due to miss rate neglect. I will present the results from two experiments on miss rate neglect in legal decision making, conducted by the LEVIC research group at Lund University.

14/04/2015 17:30-18:20+
Amrish Patel (Gothenburg & Oxford) will present
Causal Overdetermination and Blame: A Discussion” (abstract below).
Inside BELSS -- our experimental lab on the 3rd floor of the Roentgen building
Afterwards we all go for a post-seminar off-campus aperitivo

Abstract: If two banks short-sell a stock the market crashes. Four banks simultaneously short-sell, each believing that all others will do so too. Who is to blame for the crash? Responsibility attribution when there are multiple sufficient causes for an outcome is no doubt a thorny issue. I motivate why it is important economists grapple with this topic and review insights from cognate disciplines (philosophy, artificial intelligence and cognitive psychology) that may help. Finally, I sketch some very preliminary research ideas to fuel discussion.

19/02/2015 17:30-18:20+
Daniel Houser (George Mason University and ICES) will talk about
Demanding or Deferring? The Economic Value of Communication with Attitude
[joint work with Siyu Wang (George Mason University)]
5th Floor Seminar Room in Roentgen, 5-E4-SR04 (not the lab!)
Afterwards we all go for a post-seminar off-campus aperitivo

Daniel Houser is a leading experimental economist whose research is at the crossroads of economics, neuroscience, and evolutionary psychology.

05/02/2015 17:30-18:20+
Natalia Montinari (Lund University) will talk about
Back Scratching in Hierarchical Organizations
Inside BELSS -- our experimental lab on the 3rd floor of the Roentgen building
Afterwards we all go for a post-seminar off-campus aperitivo

Natalia, who does all sorts of interesting research in Behavioral and Experimental Economics, will visit BELSS during the period February 2-27. We hope many will wish to interact with Natalia, and this event offers a great chance to come and meet her.

29/01/2015 17:30-18:20+
Marta Maras (Bocconi, M&T) will talk about
Holier than Thou? A Natural Field Experiment on Social Information in Charitable Giving
(with Jim Andreoni and Matt Goldman)
Inside BELSS -- our experimental lab on the 3rd floor of the Roentgen building
Afterwards we all go for a post-seminar off-campus aperitivo

Our colleague Marta Maras is back in Milan after her visit to UCSD where she started this project with Jim Andreoni and Matt Goldman. We hope many will come and learn about what they are up to.

14/01/2015 17:30-18:20+
Marcella Veronesi (U Verona and ETH Zurich)  will talk about 
Social Norms, Democracy, and Conditional Cooperation: Empirical Evidence from Switzerland
Inside BELSS -- our experimental lab on the 3rd floor of the Roentgen building
Afterwards we all go for a post-seminar off-campus aperitivo

15/12/2014 12:00-13:45
A BELSS-IGIER seminar
Salvatore Nunnari (Columbia University) will talk about
The Dynamic Free Rider Problem: A laboratory study.
Room 5-E4-SR04 (Grafton building in via Roentgen, 5th floor)

01/12/2014 17:30-18:20
Martin Dufwenberg (Bocconi) and Georg Kirchsteiger (ECARES, UL Bruxelles) will talk about
Incentivizing Experimental Research
Room 3-E4-SR03 (Grafton building in via Roentgen, 3rd floor)
Afterwards we all go for a post-seminar off-campus aperitivo

The event will have two parts. First MD presents his paper "Keeping Researchers Honest: The Case for Sealed-Envelope-Submissions," which is joint work with Peter Martinsson. Then GK will offer his perspective on the topic-of-the-day, including on the D&M paper.

Georg Kirchsteiger, who is also giving a seminar in the Theory & Experiments series the next day, is doing all sorts of interesting research in the fields of behavioral economics, experimental economics, game theory, and industrial economics.

13/11/2014 17:30-18:20
Ekaterina Netchaeva and Burak Oc (Bocconi) will talk about
Experiments in Micro OB
Inside BELSS -- our experimental lab on the 3rd floor of the Roentgen building
Afterwards we all go for a post-seminar off-campus aperitivo

Details

03/11/2014 17:30-18:20
Björn Bartling (University of Zurich) will talk about
Do Markets Erode Social Responsibility?  (j/w Roberto Weber and Lan Yao) 
Room 3-E4-SR04 (Grafton building in via Roentgen, 3rd floor)
Afterwards we all go for a post-seminar off-campus aperitivo

Details

16/09/2014 17:30-18:20
David Butler (Murdoch University) and Joerg Oechssler (University of Heidelberg) will talk about
Ambiguity & Imprecision Aperitivo
Inside BELSS -- our experimental lab on the 3rd floor of the Roentgen building
Afterwards we all go for a post-seminar off-campus aperitivo

Details

17/06/2014 17:30-18:20
Tim Hellman (University of Bielefeld)
The Dynamics of Continuous Cultural Traits in Social Networks
Inside BELSS -- our experimental lab on the 3rd floor of the Roentgen building
Afterwards we all go for a post-seminar off-campus aperitivo

Details

03/06/2014 17:30-18:20
Volodymyr Lugovskyy & Daniela Puzzello (Indiana University)
Trading Institutions in Experimental Asset Markets: Theory & Evidence
Inside BELSS -- our experimental lab on the 3rd floor of the Roentgen building
Afterwards we all go for a post-seminar off-campus aperitivo

Details

07/05/2014 10:30-12:00 and 17:00-18:30
BELSS-IGIER Special-Lectures Series
Ingela Alger (Toulouse School of Economics) & Jörgen Weibull (Stockholm School of Economics)
Evolution of Preferences
5-E4-sr04 (5th floor Roentgen Building)
Afterwards we all go for a post-seminar off-campus aperitivo

Details

30/04/2014 17:30-18:20
Fernando Vega-Redondo (DEC, Università Bocconi) (j/w Paolo Pin)
The Shadow of Authority
Inside BELSS -- our experimental lab on the 3rd floor of the Roentgen building
Afterwards we all go for a post-seminar off-campus aperitivo

Details

16/04/2014 17:30-18:20
Jérémy Celse (Burgundy School of Business) 
Altruistic behaviour depends on what we think others expect: How implicit expectations shape pro-sociality
Inside BELSS -- our experimental lab on the 3rd floor of the Roentgen building
Afterwards we all go for a post-seminar off-campus aperitivo

Details

09/04/2014 17:30-18:20
Friederike Mengel (U of Essex & Maastricht U) 
An Experiment on Belief Formation in Networks
Inside BELSS -- our experimental lab on the 3rd floor of the Roentgen building
Afterwards we all go for a post-seminar off-campus aperitivo

Details

02/04/2014 17:30-18:20
Marco Mantovani (Université Saint-Louis)
Whom are you talking with? An experiment on group play and communication
Inside BELSS -- our experimental lab on the 3rd floor of the Roentgen building
Afterwards we all go for a post-seminar off-campus aperitivo

Details

19/03/2014 17:30-18:20
Emre Soyer (Ozyegin University) (j/w Robin M. Hogarth)
What are the chances of winning? Exploring the ecology and psychology
Inside BELSS -- our experimental lab on the 3rd floor of the Roentgen building
Afterwards we all go for a post-seminar off-campus aperitivo

Details

13/03/2014 09:00-09:50
Peter Bossaerts (U Utah) 
Dark markets & algorithmic trading
Inside BELSS -- our experimental lab on the 3rd floor of the Roentgen building
Breakfast: will be served!

Details

05/03/2014 17:30-18:20
Matthias Sutter (EUI) 
The effects of language on children’s intertemporal choices
Inside BELSS -- our experimental lab located in the 3rd floor of Bocconi’s Roentgen building, via Roentgen 1, Milano
Afterwards we all go for a post-seminar off-campus aperitivo

Details

19/02/2014 17:30-18:20
Luca Corazzini (University of Padua) (j/w S. Galavotti, R. Sausgruber & P. Valbonesi).
Allotment in First-Price Auctions: an Experimental Investigation
Inside BELSS -- our experimental lab located in the 3rd floor of Bocconi’s Roentgen building, via Roentgen 1, Milano
Afterwards we all go for a post-seminar off-campus aperitivo

Details

 

27/01/2014 17:30-18:20
Erik Kimbrough (Simon Frasier U.) (j/w Alexander (Sasha) Vostroknutov).
Norms make preferences social
Inside BELSS -- our experimental lab located in the 3rd floor of Bocconi’s Roentgen building, via Roentgen 1, Milano
Afterwards we all go for a post-seminar off-campus aperitivo

Details

 

15/01/2014 17:30-18:20
Josh Miller (Bocconi) (j/w Jeff Butler)
Social Risk: The Role of Intent and Competence
Inside BELSS -- our experimental lab located in the 3rd floor of Bocconi’s Roentgen building, via Roentgen 1, Milano
Afterwards we all go for a post-seminar off-campus aperitivo

Details

 

09/12/2013 17:30-18:20
Eugenio Proto (Warwick) (j/w Aldo Rustichini)
Cooperation & Personality
Room 3-E4-SR03 via Roentgen 1, Milano
Afterwards we all go for a post-seminar off-campus aperitivo

Details

 

30/10/2013 10:30-12:30
Experiments at DEC: Coffee break with Gary Charness
Room 3-E4-SR03 via Roentgen 1, Milano

Details

28/10/2013 09:30-17:30
Experiments in Business and Economics
Room N01 piazza Sraffa 13, Milano

Details