
Policy makers and managers often turn to experts when in need of information, but we should expect experts to be systematically biased. This is because the decision to research a question implies a belief that research will be fruitful. If priors about the impact of one’s work are correct on average, then those who choose to research a question are optimistic about the quality of their work. The bias varies predictably with attributes of the question being studied. This fact has implications for a variety of mechanism design applications and yields predictions in accordance with a large literature in psychology. This paper was accepted by Teck-Hua Ho, behavioral economics.
| selected citations These citations are derived from selected sources. This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | 4 | |
| popularity This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network. | Average | |
| influence This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | Average | |
| impulse This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network. | Average |
