Abstract
AbstractDifferences in cognitive sophistication and effort are at the root of behavioral heterogeneity in economics. To explain this heterogeneity, behavioral models assume that certain choices indicate higher cognitive effort. A fundamental problem with this approach is that observing a choice does not reveal how the choice is made, and hence choice data is insufficient to establish the link between cognitive effort and behavior. We show that deliberation times provide an individually-measurable correlate of cognitive effort. We test a model of heterogeneous cognitive depth, incorporating stylized facts from the psychophysical literature, which makes predictions on the relation between choices, cognitive effort, incentives, and deliberation times. We confirm the predicted relations experimentally in different kinds of games.
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Subject
Economics, Econometrics and Finance (miscellaneous)
Reference83 articles.
1. Achtziger, A., & Alós-Ferrer, C. (2014). Fast or rational? A response-times study of Bayesian updating. Management Science, 60(4), 923–938.
2. Agranov, M., Caplin, A., & Tergiman, C. (2015). Naive play and the process of choice in guessing games. Journal of the Economic Science Association, 1(2), 146–157.
3. Alaoui, L., & Penta, A. (2016a). Endogenous depth of reasoning. Review of Economic Studies, 83(4), 1297–1333.
4. Alaoui, L., & Penta, A. (2016b). Endogenous depth of reasoning and response time, with an application to the attention-allocation task. Mimeo: Universitat Pompeu Fabra.
5. Alaoui, L., & Penta, A. (2016c). Cost-benefit analysis in reasoning. Mimeo: University of Wisconsin.
Cited by
11 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献，注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献，订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献