A surprising result on the differences in competitive behavior between women and men

A vast literature in economics shows that men are on average more competitive than women. The dominant explanation for this difference is a tendency for men to be overconfident in their abilities.

A working paper by Tünde Lénárd, Dániel Horn and Hubert János Kiss challenges this explanation.

Like the pre-existing scientific literature, the working paper also measures that men are more competitive than women. But it fails to establish that the difference is due to a tendency for men to be overconfident.

In a laboratory experiment, the researchers measure three levels of confidence among subjects: overconfidence (subject overestimates their performance), underconfidence (subject underestimates their performance), and realistic (subject estimates their abilities performance). If the dominant explanation is correct, among overconfident subjects, men should be more competitive than women. However, surprisingly, there is no difference in competitive behavior between women and men among overconfident subjects. There is also no difference among underconfident subjects.

But among subjects who are realistic about their performance, men are more competitive than women - and the difference is significant.

As a result, the working paper fails to establish that the difference in competitive behavior is due to men’s overconfidence. The result is robust to different statistical specifications, suggesting that it is not an artifact in the experimental data.

Two notes, however. The first is that it is a working paper, which has not been peer-reviewed. The second is that it is a single article. Its result will have to be replicated by other articles to be confirmed, refined, or refuted.

Competition, confidence and gender: shifting the focus from

The gender gap in competitiveness is argued to explain gender differences in later life outcomes, including career choices and the gender wage gap. In experimental settings, a prevalent explanation at

Tünde Lénárd & Hubert János Kiss & Dániel Horn

Abstract

The gender gap in competitiveness is argued to explain gender differences in later life outcomes, including career choices and the gender wage gap. In experimental settings, a prevalent explanation attributes this gap to males being more (over)confident than females (we call this the compositional channel). While our lab-in-the-field study using data from students in 53 classrooms (N$>$1000) reproduces this finding, it also uncovers a second, potentially more impactful channel of confidence contributing to the gender gap in competitiveness (the preference channel). To disentangle the two channels, we propose a more precise measure of confidence based on whether the subjects’ believed performance rank exceeds, coincides with or falls short of their actual performance in a real-effort task. We label categories of this Guessed - Actual Performance (GAP) difference as overconfident, realistic or underconfident, respectively. Surprisingly, there is no gender difference in competitiveness within the over- and underconfident subgroups, while a significant gender gap exists among the realistic. So, even if both genders had the same level of confidence, a persistent gender gap in preference (or taste) for competition would remain in the realistic group. This finding is robust across all specifications, challenging previous theories about the overconfidence of men being the sole driver of the relationship between confidence and the gender gap in competition.

Bibliography

Lénárd, Tünde, Hubert János Kiss, and Dániel Horn. 2023. “Competition, Confidence and Gender: Shifting the Focus from the Overconfident to the Realistic.” CERS-IE Working Papers. Institute of Economics, Centre for Economic and Regional Studies. https://ideas.repec.org//p/has/discpr/2327.html.