Systematically Biased Beliefs about Economics: Robust Evidence of Judgemental Anomalies from the Survey of Americans and Economists on the Economy

Abstract

Differences between the general public's positive economic views and economists' resemble other judgemental anomalies: Laypeople and experts systematically disagree. I analyse this puzzle using data from the Survey of Americans and Economists on the Economy. The paper first tests and decisively rejects the hypothesis that the differences solely reflect economists' self‐serving bias. Then it examines whether economists' political ideology and party loyalties explain the disagreement; if anything, this slightly increases their magnitude. The effect of economic training clearly falls but remains large after adding education to the set of control variables. Apparent biases' robustness suggests that the anomaly is real.

Cite this work

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 258 citations exist upstream.

Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.