Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: https://hdl.handle.net/10419/300031 
Year of Publication: 
2024
Series/Report no.: 
CESifo Working Paper No. 11103
Publisher: 
CESifo GmbH, Munich
Abstract: 
Good decision-making requires understanding the causal impact of our actions. Often, we only have access to correlational data that could stem from multiple causal mechanisms with divergent implications for choice. Our experiments comprehensively characterize choice when subjects face conflicting causal interpretations of such data. Behavior primarily reflects three types: following interpretations that make attractive promises, choosing cautiously, and assessing the fit of interpretations to the data. We characterize properties of interpretations that obscure bad fit to subjects. Preferences for more complex models are more common than those reflecting Occam's razor. Implications extend to the Causal Narratives and Model Persuasion literatures.
JEL: 
C91
D01
D83
Document Type: 
Working Paper
Appears in Collections:

Files in This Item:
File
Size





Items in EconStor are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.