MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2595468918 · doi:10.3386/w23240

Worker Overconfidence: Field Evidence and Implications for Employee Turnover and Returns from Training

2017· report· en· W2595468918 on OpenAlexaff
Mitchell Hoffman, Stephen V. Burks

Bibliographic record

VenueNational Bureau of Economic Research · 2017
Typereport
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicLabor market dynamics and wage inequality
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
FundersUniversity of MinnesotaAlfred P. Sloan FoundationEwing Marion Kauffman FoundationJohn D. and Catherine T. MacArthur FoundationNational Science Foundation
KeywordsOverconfidence effectTurnoverTraining (meteorology)BusinessField (mathematics)PsychologyLabour economicsDemographic economicsEconomicsSocial psychologyManagementMathematicsGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A previous paper appeared as "Training Contracts, Worker Overconfidence, and the Return from Firm-Sponsored General Training."That previous paper has been divided in two, with the present paper focusing on overconfidence.The other paper (Hoffman and Burks, 2017) studies the impact of training contracts on quitting, and uses a different dataset (though also based on workers at Firm A).Across the two papers, some portions of text may be similar.We are deeply indebted to David Card, Stefano DellaVigna, John Morgan, and Steve Tadelis for their advice and encouragement.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.008
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.036
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.011
Threshold uncertainty score0.042

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0080.036
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.537
GPT teacher head0.512
Teacher spread0.025 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations12
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNational Bureau of Economic Research→Same topicLabor market dynamics and wage inequality→French-language works237,207→