Nonetheless these are interesting results, worthy of further examination:
The measurement of intelligence should identify and measure an individual’s subjective confidence that a response to a test question is correct. Existing measures do not do that, nor do they use extrinsic financial incentive for truthful responses. We rectify both issues, and show that each matters for the measurement of intelligence, particularly for women. Our results on gender and confidence in the face of risk have wider applications in terms of the measurement of “competitiveness” and financial literacy. Contrary to received literature, women are more intelligent than men, compete when they should in risky settings, and are more literate.
That is from the September JPE, by Glenn W. Harrison, Don Ross, and J. Todd Swarthout. Here are ungated versions of the paper. Here is Bryan Caplan on the limitations of any single paper.
The post It would take more than one paper to establish these claims appeared first on Marginal REVOLUTION.
