We study how cognitive abilities correlate with behavioral choices by collecting evidence from almost 1200 subjects across eight experimental projects concerning a wide variety of tasks, including some classic risk and social preference elicitation protocols. The Cognitive Reflection Test (CRT) has been administered to all our experimental subjects, which makes our dataset one of the largest in the literature. We partition our subject pool into three groups depending on their CRT performance. Reflective subjects are those answering at least two of the three CRT questions correctly. Impulsive subjects are those who are unable to suppress the instinctive impulse to follow the intuitive â although incorrect â answer in at least two 2 questions. The remaining subjects form a residual group. We find that females score significantly less than males in the CRT and that, in their wrong answers, impulsive ones are observed more frequently. The 2D:4D ratio, which is higher for females, is correlated negatively with subjectsâ CRT score. We also find that differences in risk attitudes across CRT groups crucially depend on the elicitation task. Finally, impulsive subjects have higher social (inequity-averse) concerns, while reflective subjects are more likely to satisfy basic consistency requirements in lottery choices.
|Titolo:||Cognitive (ir)reflection: New experimental evidence|
|Autori interni:||PONTI, GIOVANNI|
|Data di pubblicazione:||2016|
|Rivista:||JOURNAL OF BEHAVIORAL AND EXPERIMENTAL ECONOMICS|
|Appare nelle tipologie:||01.1 - Articolo su rivista (Article)|
File in questo prodotto:
|CRT_Published_Paper.pdf||Articolo pubblicato in rivista||Versione dell'editore||NON PUBBLICO - Accesso privato/ristretto||Administrator|