Is Overconfidence a Trait? An Adversarial Collaboration

Abstract

A fundamental underlying question about the nature of overconfidence has continued to be subject to scholarly dispute: Is overconfidence a genuine psychological trait? To advance this contested research topic, we engaged in an adversarial collaboration in which two research teams agreed upon a set of critical tests and preregistered their analyses and predictions prior to data collection. Our study (N = 942; U.S. adults from CloudConnect) leverages a methodological innovation: To measure trait overconfidence absent task-related confounds, we developed a set of novel tasks in which performance is ostensibly random. When we assess confidence this way, we find robust relationships across tasks as measured by both confirmatory factor analyses and raw correlations. This indicates that some people do believe that they are able to perform relatively well on tasks even when there is little reason for that confidence. Our results support the claim that overconfidence might be a trait.

Keywords

overconfidence confidence adversarial collaboration trait individual difference

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Acker

Duck

N. W.

(2008). Cross-cultural overconfidence and biased self-attribution. Journal of Socio-Economics, 37(5), 1815–1824.

Amirkhanyan

Krawczyk

Wilamowski

Bokszczanin

(2024). Overconfidence: The roles of gender, public observability and incentives. Journal of the Economic Science Association, 10(1), 76–97. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40881-023-00149-z

Barber

B. M.

Odean

(2001). Boys will be boys: Gender, overconfidence, and common stock investment. Quarterly Journal of Economics, 116(1), 261–292. https://doi.org/10.1162/003355301556400

Baron

(1994). Thinking and deciding (2nd ed.). Cambridge University Press.

Bazerman

M. H.

Moore

D. A.

(2013). Judgment in managerial decision making (8th ed.). Wiley.

Binnendyk

Pennycook

(2023). Individual differences in overconfidence: A new measurement approach (SSRN Scholarly Paper 4563382). https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.4563382

Binnendyk

Pennycook

. (2024). Individual differences in overconfidence: A new measurement approach. Judgment and Decision Making, 19, e28.

Campbell

W. K.

Goodie

A. S.

Foster

J. D.

(2004). Narcissism, confidence, and risk attitude. Journal of Behavioral Decision Making, 17(4), 297–311. https://doi.org/10.1002/bdm.475

Cohen

(1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences (2nd ed.). Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203771587

10.

Enders

C. K.

Bandalos

D. L.

(2001). The relative performance of full information maximum likelihood estimation for missing data in structural equation models. Structural Equation Modeling: A Multidisciplinary Journal, 8(3), 430–457. https://doi.org/10.1207/S15328007SEM0803_5

11.

Exley

C. L.

Kessler

J. B.

(2022). The gender gap in self-promotion. The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 137(3), 1345–1381. https://doi.org/10.1093/qje/qjac003

12.

Fleeson

(2001). Toward a structure- and process-integrated view of personality: Traits as density distributions of states. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 80(6), Article 6. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.80.6.1011

13.

Fleeson

Gallagher

(2009). The implications of Big Five standing for the distribution of trait manifestation in behavior: Fifteen experience-sampling studies and a meta-analysis. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 97(6), Article 6.

14.

Gao

Wang

Nelson

. (2023, November 17-20). Extremity bias in survey responses generates strong yet invalid results [Conference presentation abstract]. Annual Conference of the Society for Judgment and Decision Making, San Francisco, CA, United States. https://sjdm.org/programs/2023-program.pdf

15.

Heydari

Sheybani

Yoonessi

(2023). Iranian emotional face database: Acquisition and validation of a stimulus set of basic facial expressions. Behavior Research Methods, 55(1), 143–150. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13428-022-01812-9

16.

Lackner

Francisco

Mendonça

Mata

Gonçalves-Sá

(2023). Intermediate levels of scientific knowledge are associated with overconfidence and negative attitudes towards science. Nature Human Behaviour, 7, 1490–1501. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41562-023-01677-8

17.

Lawson

M. A.

Larrick

R. P.

Soll

J. B

. (2023). Individual differences in overconfidence and their psychological bases (INSEAD Working Paper No. 2025/24/DSC). SSRN. https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.4558486

18.

Hale

Moore

D. A.

(2024). Is overconfidence an individual difference? https://osf.io/tb2me/

19.

Hale

Moore

D. A

. (2025). Is overconfidence an individual difference? Judgment and Decision Making, 20, e25.

20.

Light

Fernbach

P. M.

Rabb

Geana

M. V.

Sloman

S. A.

(2022). Knowledge overconfidence is associated with anti-consensus views on controversial scientific issues. Science Advances, 8(29), Article eabo0038. https://doi.org/10.1126/SCIADV.ABO0038

21.

Littrell

Risko

E. F.

Fugelsang

J. A.

(2021). ‘You can’t bullshit a bullshitter’ (or can you?): Bullshitting frequency predicts receptivity to various types of misleading information. British Journal of Social Psychology, 60(4), 1484–1505. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjso.12447

22.

Lundeberg

M. A.

Fox

P. W.

Punc´cohar´

(1994). Highly confident but wrong: Gender differences and similarities in confidence judgments. Journal of Educational Psychology, 86, 114–121. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0663.86.1.114

23.

Lyons

B. A.

Montgomery

J. M.

Guess

A. M.

Nyhan

Reifler

(2021). Overconfidence in news judgments is associated with false news susceptibility. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 118(23), Article e2019527118. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.2019527118

24.

Malmendier

Tate

(2015). Behavioral CEOs: The role of managerial overconfidence. The Journal of Economic Perspectives, 29(4), Article 4.

25.

Martel

Rathje

Clark

C. J.

Pennycook

Van Bavel

J. J.

Rand

D. G.

van der Linden

(2024). On the efficacy of accuracy prompts across partisan lines: An adversarial collaboration. Psychological Science, 35(4), 435–450. https://doi.org/10.1177/09567976241232905

26.

McNeish

Wolf

M. G

. (2023). Dynamic fit index cutoffs for one-factor models. Behavior Research Methods, 55(3), 1157–1174.

27.

Mischel

(1968). Personality and assessment. Wiley.

28.

Moore

D. A

. (2023). Overprecision is a property of thinking systems. Psychological Review, 130(5), 1339–1356.

29.

Moore

D. A.

Carter

Yang

H. H. J.

(2015). Wide of the mark: Evidence on the underlying causes of overprecision in judgment. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 131, 110–120.

30.

Moore

D. A.

Healy

P. J.

(2008). The trouble with overconfidence. Psychological Review, 115(2), 502–517.

31.

Moore

D. A.

Schatz

(2017). The three faces of overconfidence. Social and Personality Psychology Compass, 11(8), Article e12331. https://doi.org/10.1111/spc3.12331

32.

Moore

D. A.

Small

D. A.

(2007). Error and bias in comparative social judgment: On being both better and worse than we think we are. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 92(6), 972–989. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.92.6.972

33.

Nekby

Thoursie

P. S.

Vahtrik

(2008). Gender and self-selection into a competitive environment: Are women more overconfident than men? Economics Letters, 100(3), 405–407.

34.

Niederle

Vesterlund

(2007). Do women shy away from competition? Do men compete too much? Quarterly Journal of Economics, 122(3), 1067–1101.

35.

O’Reilly

C. A.

Hall

(2021). Grandiose narcissists and decision making: Impulsive, overconfident, and skeptical of experts–but seldom in doubt. Personality and Individual Differences, 168, Article 110280. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2020.110280

36.

Parker

A. M.

Stone

E. R.

(2013). Identifying the effects of unjustified confidence versus overconfidence: Lessons learned from two analytic methods. Journal of Behavioral Decision Making, 27(2), 134–145. https://doi.org/10.1002/bdm.1787

37.

Peng

R. X.

Shen

(2024). Why fall for misinformation? Role of information processing strategies, health consciousness, and overconfidence in health literacy. Journal of Health Psychology, 30(8), 2030–2045. https://doi.org/10.1177/13591053241273647

38.

Pennycook

Binnendyk

Rand

(2025). Overconfidently conspiratorial: Conspiracy believers are dispositionally overconfident and massively overestimate how much others agree with them. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1177/01461672251338358

39.

Prims

J. P.

Moore

D. A.

(2017). Overconfidence over the lifespan. Judgment and Decision Making, 12(1), 29–41.

40.

Sanchez

Dunning

(2018). Overconfidence among beginners: Is a little learning a dangerous thing? Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 114(1), 10–28. https://doi.org/10.1037/pspa0000102

41.

Soto

C. J.

John

O. P.

(2017). The next Big Five Inventory (BFI-2): Developing and assessing a hierarchical model with 15 facets to enhance bandwidth, fidelity, and predictive power. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 113(1), 117–143. https://doi.org/10.1037/pspp0000096

42.

Spiller

S. A

. (2024). Widely-used measures of overconfidence are confounded with ability. SSRN. https://ssrn.com/abstract=4468920

43.

Vancouver

J. B.

Thompson

C. M.

Tischner

E. C.

Putka

D. J

. (2002). Two studies examining the negative effect of self-efficacy on performance. Journal of Applied Psychology, 87(3), 506–516.

44.

Vitriol

J. A.

Marsh

J. K.

(2018). The illusion of explanatory depth and endorsement of conspiracy beliefs. European Journal of Social Psychology, 48(7), 955–969. https://doi.org/10.1002/ejsp.2504

45.

Walters

D. J.

Fernbach

P. M.

Fox

C. R.

Sloman

S. A

. (2017). Known unknowns: A critical determinant of confidence and calibration. Management Science, 63(12), 4298–4307.

46.

Weber

E. U.

Johnson

E. J.

(2009). Decisions under uncertainty: Psychological, economic, and neuroeconomic explanations of risk preference. In Glimcher

P. W.

Camerer

C. F.

Fehr

Poldrack

R. A.

(Eds.), Neuroeconomics (pp. 127–144). Elsevier.

Supplementary Material

Please find the following supplemental material available below.

For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.

For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.

0.00 MB

1.12 MB