nep-neu New Economics Papers
on Neuroeconomics
Issue of 2016‒11‒27
four papers chosen by
Daniel Houser
George Mason University

  1. Multigenerational persistence. Evidence from 146 years of administrative data By Jørgen Modalsli
  2. The Effect Of Life Kinetik Trainings On Coordinative Abilities By Alper Tunga Peker; Halil Taskin
  3. Economics meets Psychology:Experimental and self-reported Measures of Individual Competitiveness By Werner Bönte; Sandro Lombardo; Diemo Urbig
  4. Optimal Illusion of Control and Related Perception Biases By Olivier Gossner; Jakub Steiner

  1. By: Jørgen Modalsli (Statistics Norway)
    Abstract: There is increasing evidence that intergenerational transmission of economic characteristics goes beyond what can be measured by parent-child associations. However, existing studies are based on samples from small geographic areas or particular time periods, making it hard to know to what extent these multigenerational processes can be generalized across space and time, and how they depend on the measurement of economic outcomes. This paper uses Norwegian census data on occupational associations among grandfathers, fathers and sons from 1865 to 2011 and finds significant grandparental influence throughout the period. In particular, the additional grandparental influence is strong for white-collar occupations. The findings are robust to alternative ways of measuring the characteristics of the parent generation, and to the use of income rather than occupation as a measure of economic status. Multigenerational persistence is found to have been stronger early in the period, before the establishment of a modern welfare state, suggesting that institutions play a part in how economic characteristics are transmitted across generations. Persistence is strong also in subpopulations where generations grew up in different parts of the country. This shows that the grandparental effect is not exclusively driven by direct interpersonal interaction between individuals across generations.
    Keywords: Multigenerational mobility; human capital transmission; occupational mobility; income mobility; grandfathers
    JEL: J62 D31 N33 N34
    Date: 2016–11
    URL: http://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:ssb:dispap:850&r=neu
  2. By: Alper Tunga Peker (Agri Ibrahim Cecen University); Halil Taskin (Selcuk University Faculty of Sport Sciences)
    Abstract: This study was aimed to examine the effect of life kinetik trainings by 8 weeks on coordinative abilities. 24 volunteers have participated in the study. We have separated 12 subjects who (mean ± SD age, 11.75 ± 1.29 years; height, 141 ± 0.08 cm; weight, 34.66 ± 10.03 kg as control group, 12 subjects (mean ± SD age, 12.75 ± 1.36 years; height, 139 ± 0.07 cm; weight, 33.75 ± 7.40 kg as experiment group. Each group were performing summer football school trainings 3 days per a week. In addition to, The experiment group has been performed 45 minutes life kinetik training program 3 days per a week during 8 weeks by us. Rhythm, orientation, differentiation and balance skills have been determined as coordinative abilities and have been tested both pre and post life kinetik trainings by 8 weeks. When the experiment group’s pre test-post test results have been compared, There was a significantly decrease between pre test and post test results for balance pad error score, balance total error score, rhythm ability and orientation ability (p 0,05). When the control group’s pre test-post test results have been compared, There was no a significantly difference between pre test and post test results for balance flat floor error score, balance pad error score, balance total error score, rhythm ability, orientation ability and differentiation ability (p>0,05). In conclusion, it can be thought that life kinetik effects on balance, rhythm ve orientation of coordinative abilities. On the other hand, it can be thought that life kinetic doesn’t effect on differentiation of coordinative abilities.
    Keywords: Life kinetic, coordinative abilities, children, sports
    URL: http://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:sek:iacpro:5306946&r=neu
  3. By: Werner Bönte (University of Wuppertal, Schumpeter School of Business and Economics; University of Wuppertal, Jackstädt Center of Entrepreneurship and Innovation Research; Indiana University, School of Public & Environmental Affairs, Institute for Development Strategies); Sandro Lombardo (University of Wuppertal, Schumpeter School of Business and Economics); Diemo Urbig (University of Wuppertal, Schumpeter School of Business and Economics; University of Wuppertal, Jackstädt Center of Entrepreneurship and Innovation Research; Indiana University, School of Public & Environmental Affairs, Institute for Development Strategies)
    Abstract: Economists and psychologists follow different approaches to measure individual competitiveness. While psychologists typically use self-reported psychometric scales, economists tend to use incentivized behavioral experiments, where subjects confronted with a specific task self-select into a competitive versus a piece-rate payment scheme. So far, both measurement approaches have remained largely isolated from one another. We discuss how these approaches are linked and based on a classroom experiment with 186 students we empirically examine the relationship between a behavioral competitiveness measure and a self-reported competitiveness scale. We find a stable positive relationship between these measures suggesting that both measures are indicators of the same underlying latent variable, which might be interpreted as a general preference to enter competitive situations. Moreover, our results suggest that the self-reported scale partly rests on motives related to personal development, whereas the behavioral measure does not reflect competitiveness motivated by personal development. Our study demonstrates how comparative studies such as ours can open up new avenues for the further development of both behavioral experiments and psychometric scales that aim at measuring individual competitiveness.
    Keywords: Competition, Experiment, Tournament scheme, Personal Development Motive
    JEL: C91 D03 M52
    Date: 2016–11
    URL: http://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:bwu:schdps:sdp16006&r=neu
  4. By: Olivier Gossner; Jakub Steiner
    Abstract: We study perception biases arising under second-best perception strategies. An agent correctly observes a parameter that is payoff-relevant in many decision problems that she encounters in her environment but is unable to retain all the information until her decision. A designer of the decision process chooses a perception strategy that determines the distribution of the perception errors. If some information loss is unavoidable due to cognition constraints, then (under additional conditions) the optimal perception strategy exhibits the illusion of control, overconfidence, and optimism.
    Date: 2016–09
    URL: http://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:cer:papers:wp571&r=neu

This nep-neu issue is ©2016 by Daniel Houser. It is provided as is without any express or implied warranty. It may be freely redistributed in whole or in part for any purpose. If distributed in part, please include this notice.
General information on the NEP project can be found at http://nep.repec.org. For comments please write to the director of NEP, Marco Novarese at <director@nep.repec.org>. Put “NEP” in the subject, otherwise your mail may be rejected.
NEP’s infrastructure is sponsored by the School of Economics and Finance of Massey University in New Zealand.