Cognitive Limitations: Failures of Contingent Thinking

Literature Cited

1. Akerlof GA. 1970. The market for lemons: quality uncertainty and the market mechanism. Q. J. Econ. 84:3488–500
   [Google Scholar]
2. Ali SN, Mihm M, Siga L, Tergiman C. 2021. Adverse and advantageous selection in the laboratory. Am. Econ. Rev. 111:72152–78
   [Google Scholar]
3. Araujo FA, Wang SW, Wilson AJ. 2021. The times they are a-changing: dynamic adverse selection in the laboratory. Am. Econ. J. Microecon. 13:41–22
   [Google Scholar]
4. Barron K, Huck S, Jehiel P. 2019. Everyday econometricians: selection neglect and overoptimism when learning from others Discuss. Pap. SP II 2019-301 Wiss. Berl. Sozialforsch. Berlin, Ger:.
5. Benjamin DJ. 2019. Errors in probabilistic reasoning and judgment biases. Handbook of Behavioral Economics: Foundations and Applications, Vol. 2 BD Bernheim, S DellaVigna, D Laibson 69–186. Amsterdam: North-Holland
   [Google Scholar]
6. Bhargava S, Loewenstein G, Sydnor J. 2017. Choose to lose: health plan choices from a menu with dominated option. Q. J. Econ. 132:31319–72
   [Google Scholar]
7. Bó I, Hakimov R. 2020. Iterative versus standard deferred acceptance: experimental evidence. Econ. J. 130:626356–92
   [Google Scholar]
8. Bordalo P, Gennaioli N, Shleifer A. 2012. Salience theory of choice under risk. Q. J. Econ. 127:31243–85
   [Google Scholar]
9. Bordalo P, Gennaioli N, Shleifer A. 2013. Salience and consumer choice. J. Political Econ. 121:5803–43
   [Google Scholar]
10. Bordalo P, Gennaioli N, Shleifer A. 2020. Memory, attention, and choice. Q. J. Econ. 135:31399–442
    [Google Scholar]
11. Bordalo P, Gennaioli N, Shleifer A. 2022. Salience. Annu. Rev. Econ. 14:521–44
    [Google Scholar]
12. Brocas I, Carrillo JD. 2022. Adverse selection and contingent reasoning in preadolescents and teenagers. Games Econ. Behav. 133:331–51
    [Google Scholar]
13. Calford EM, Cason TN. 2021. Contingent reasoning and dynamic public goods provision ANU Work. Pap. Econ. Econom. 2021-679, Aust. Natl. Univ. Canberra:
14. Charness G, Levin D. 2009. The origin of the winner's curse: a laboratory study. Am. Econ. J. Microecon. 1:1207–36
    [Google Scholar]
15. Cohen S, Li S. 2022. Sequential cursed equilibrium. arXiv:2212.06025 [econ.TH]
16. Cooper DJ, Fang H. 2008. Understanding overbidding in second price auctions: an experimental study. Econ. J. 118:5321572–95
    [Google Scholar]
17. Costa-Gomes MA, Weizsäcker G. 2008. Stated beliefs and play in normal-form games. Rev. Econ. Stud. 75:3729–62
    [Google Scholar]
18. Crawford VP, Iriberri N. 2007. Level-k auctions: Can a nonequilibrium model of strategic thinking explain the winner's curse and overbidding in private-value auctions?. Econometrica 75:61721–70
    [Google Scholar]
19. Croson RT. 1999. The disjunction effect and reason-based choice in games. Organ. Behav. Hum. Decis. Process. 80:2118–33
    [Google Scholar]
20. Croson RT. 2000. Thinking like a game theorist: factors affecting the frequency of equilibrium play. J. Econ. Behav. Organ. 41:3299–314
    [Google Scholar]
21. Dhami S. 2016. The Foundations of Behavioral Economic Analysis Oxford, UK: Oxford Univ. Press
22. Ellsberg D. 1961. Risk, ambiguity, and the savage axioms. Q. J. Econ. 75:4643–69
    [Google Scholar]
23. Enke B. 2020. What you see is all there is. Q. J. Econ. 135:31363–98
    [Google Scholar]
24. Enke B, Zimmermann F. 2019. Correlation neglect in belief formation. Rev. Econ. Stud. 86:1313–32
    [Google Scholar]
25. Erev I, Bornstein G, Wallsten TS. 1993. The negative effect of probability assessments on decision quality. Organ. Behav. Hum. Decis. Process. 55:178–94
    [Google Scholar]
26. Esponda I. 2008. Behavioral equilibrium in economies with adverse selection. Am. Econ. Rev. 98:41269–91
    [Google Scholar]
27. Esponda I, Vespa E. 2014. Hypothetical thinking and information extraction in the laboratory. Am. Econ. J. Microecon. 6:4180–202
    [Google Scholar]
28. Esponda I, Vespa E. 2018. Endogenous sample selection: a laboratory study. Quant. Econ. 9:1183–216
    [Google Scholar]
29. Esponda I, Vespa E. 2021. Contingent preferences and the sure-thing principle: revisiting classic anomalies in the laboratory Work. Pap., Univ. Calif. Santa Barbara:
30. Esponda I, Vespa E, Yuksel S. 2021. Mental models and learning: the case of base-rate neglect Work. Pap., Univ. Calif. Santa Barbara:
31. Eyster E, Rabin M. 2005. Cursed equilibrium. Econometrica 73:51623–72
    [Google Scholar]
32. Eyster E, Weizsacker G. 2010. Correlation neglect in financial decision-making Discuss. Pap. 1104, DIW Berlin Berlin, Ger:.
33. Fragiadakis DE, Knoepfle DT, Niederle M. 2016. Who is strategic? Work. Pap., Stanford Univ. Stanford, CA:
34. Frydman C, Mormann M. 2016. The role of salience and attention in choice under risk: an experimental investigation Work. Pap., Univ. South. Calif. Los Angeles:
35. Gabaix X. 2014. A sparsity-based model of bounded rationality. Q. J. Econ. 129:41661–710
    [Google Scholar]
36. Gächter S, Renner E. 2010. The effects of (incentivized) belief elicitation in public goods experiments. Exp. Econ. 13:3364–77
    [Google Scholar]
37. Hassidim A, Romm A, Shorrer RI. 2021. The limits of incentives in economic matching procedures. Manag. Sci. 67:2951–63
    [Google Scholar]
38. Ivanov A, Levin D, Niederle M. 2010. Can relaxation of beliefs rationalize the winner's curse? An experimental study. Econometrica 78:41435–52
    [Google Scholar]
39. Kagel JH, Levin D. 2002. Common Value Auctions and the Winner's Curse Princeton, NJ: Princeton Univ. Press
40. Koch C, Penczynski SP. 2018. The winner's curse: conditional reasoning and belief formation. J. Econ. Theory 174:57–102
    [Google Scholar]
41. Li S. 2017. Obviously strategy-proof mechanisms. Am. Econ. Rev. 107:113257–87
    [Google Scholar]
42. Liu C, Sydnor J. 2022. Dominated options in health insurance plans. Am. Econ. J. Econ. Policy 14:1277–300
    [Google Scholar]
43. Louis P. 2015. The barrel of apples game: contingent thinking, learning from observed actions, and strategic heterogeneity Tech. Rep., Univ. Zurich, Zurich Switz:.
44. Martin D, Munoz-Rodriguez E. 2021. Misperceiving mechanisms: imperfect perception and the failure to recognize dominant strategies Work. Pap., Northwest. Univ. Evanston, IL:
45. Martínez-Marquina A, Niederle M, Vespa E. 2019. Failures in contingent reasoning: the role of uncertainty. Am. Econ. Rev. 109:103437–74
    [Google Scholar]
46. Möbius MM, Niederle M, Niehaus P, Rosenblat TS. 2022. Managing self-confidence: theory and experimental evidence. Manag. Sci. 68:117793–8514
    [Google Scholar]
47. Moser J. 2019. Hypothetical thinking and the winner's curse: an experimental investigation. Theory Decis 87:117–56
    [Google Scholar]
48. Nagel R. 1995. Unraveling in guessing games: an experimental study. Am. Econ. Rev. 85:51313–26
    [Google Scholar]
49. Ngangoué MK, Weizsäcker G. 2021. Learning from unrealized versus realized prices. Am. Econ. J. Microecon. 13:2174–201
    [Google Scholar]
50. Nielsen K, Rehbeck J. 2022. When choices are mistakes. Am. Econ. Rev. 112:72237–68
    [Google Scholar]
51. Nyarko Y, Schotter A. 2002. An experimental study of belief learning using elicited beliefs. Econometrica 70:3971–1005
    [Google Scholar]
52. Piermont E. 2021. Hypothetical expected utility. arXiv:2106.15979 [econ.TH]
53. Piermont E, Zuazo-Garin P. 2020. Failures of contingent thinking. arXiv:2007.07703 [cs.AI]
54. Rees-Jones A, Shorrer RI, Tergiman CJ 2022. Correlation neglect in student-to-school matching NBER Work. Pap. 26734
55. Rutström EE, Wilcox NT. 2009. Stated beliefs versus inferred beliefs: a methodological inquiry and experimental test. Games Econ. Behav. 67:2616–32
    [Google Scholar]
56. Samuelson WF, Bazerman MH. 1985. The winner's curse in bilateral negotiations. Research in Experimental Economics, Vol. 3 VL Smith 105–37. Bingley, UK: Emerald Group
    [Google Scholar]
57. Savage LJ. 1972. The Foundations of Statistics New York: Dover
58. Shorrer RI, Sóvágó S. 2022. Dominated choices in a strategically simple college admissions environment: the effect of admission selectivity Work. Pap., Pa. State Univ., University Park
59. Tversky A, Shafir E. 1992. The disjunction effect in choice under uncertainty. Psychol. Sci. 3:5305–10
    [Google Scholar]