| finance {smdata} | R Documentation |
Confidence in financial knowledge
Description
Choice and confidence data from a study of financial knowledge involving U.S. undergraduates.
Usage
data("finance")
Format
A data frame with 4230 observations on the following 11 variables.
subParticipant number.
jmethExperimental condition, with levels
1cd2ci3ei(see details).itemItem number.
easyfoilEquals 1 if the foil (incorrect alternative) was easy, 0 if the foil was hard (see details).
targtopEquals 1 if the correct alternative was the first one displayed (on top), 0 otherwise.
choParticipant's choice (equals one for the first alternative, 0 for the second alternative).
corrParticipant's accuracy (essentially
targtop==cho).iprobaFor conditions
2ciand3ei, the participant's confidence in the first alternative.iprobbFor conditions
2ciand3ei, the participant's confidence in the second alternative.probcThe participant's confidence in his/her choice (see details).
nchorevThe number of choice revisions that the participant made.
Details
The data come from Study 2 of Sieck, Merkle, and Van Zandt (2007). Experimental participants completed a 30-item, 2-alternative test of financial knowledge. For each item, the participant first chose an alternative and then made a confidence judgment.
The confidence
elicitation method varied across three between-subjects conditions.
For condition 1cd, participants reported confidence in their
chosen alternative on a scale from 50% to 100%. For conditions 2ci
and 3ei, participants reported independent confidence judgments
for each alternative on scales from 0% to 100%. These independent
confidence judgments are contained in iproba and iprobb.
In these conditions, probc is obtained by normalizing confidence
in the chosen alternative by the sum of independent judgments.
In addition to reporting independent confidence judgments in condition
3ei,
participants wrote an explanation in response to the
question "Why is this option true?" prior to reporting each confidence
judgment.
For each item, the incorrect alternative was manipulated to sometimes be
easy (easyfoil==1) and sometimes be difficult
(easyfoil==0). Foil difficulty was defined by the accuracy of an
independent group of students on a four-alternative version of the
financial knowledge test; see Sieck et al. for more detail.
Source
Provided by Ed Merkle.
References
Sieck, W.R., Merkle, E.C., & Van Zandt, T. (2007). Option fixation: A cognitive contributor to overconfidence. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 103, 68-83.
Examples
data("finance", package="smdata")