Moderation in Groups: Evidence from Betting on Ice Break-ups in Alaska

38Citations
Citations of this article
65Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

Abstract

We use a large sample of guessed ice break-up dates for the Tanana River in Alaska to study differences between outcomes of decisions made by individuals versus groups. We estimate the distribution of guesses conditional on whether they were made by individual bettors or betting pools. We document two major distinctions between the two sets of guesses: (1) the distribution of guesses made by groups of bettors appears to conform more to the distribution of historical break-up dates than the distribution of guesses made by individual bettors, and (2) the distribution for groups has less mass in its tails and displays lower variability than the distribution for individuals. We argue that these two pieces of evidence are consistent with the hypothesis that group decisions are more moderate, either because groups have to reach a compromise when their members disagree or because individuals with extreme opinions are less likely to be part of a group. © 2009 The Review of Economic Studies Limited.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Adams, R., & Ferreira, D. (2010). Moderation in Groups: Evidence from Betting on Ice Break-ups in Alaska. Review of Economic Studies, 77(3), 882–913. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-937X.2009.00594.x

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free