 Are we overconfident in executive overconfidence research? An examination of the convergent and content validity of extant unobtrusive measuresAaron D. Hill, David A. Kern and Margaret A. White Journal of Business Research, 2014, vol. 67, issue 7, 1414-1420 Abstract: Building understanding of overconfident executives is central to a growing literature that spans a number of disciplines. Much of this research has utilized unobtrusive, or indirect, measures to assess executive overconfidence from secondary data sources. We analyze the convergent and content validity of seven extant unobtrusive measures of executive overconfidence. The results of our analyses indicate that these measures do not exhibit adequate convergence, suggesting that existing measures are not measuring the same construct. Further, we administer a sort task to academic colleagues to assess whether scholars believe that the seven measures are adequately assessing the intended construct. The results of our sort task indicate that scholars did not categorize any of the seven measures as sufficient for measuring overconfidence. We conclude with suggestions for future research to address the inadequate convergent and content validity found in our assessment of extant measures of executive overconfidence. Keywords: Convergent validity; Indirect measures; Unobtrusive measures; Hubris; Overconfidence; Executives (search for similar items in EconPapers) Downloads: (external link) Related works: Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:eee:jbrese:v:67:y:2014:i:7:p:1414-1420 DOI: 10.1016/j.jbusres.2013.08.011 Access Statistics for this article Journal of Business Research is currently edited by A. G. Woodside More articles in Journal of Business Research from Elsevier |
Is your work missing from RePEc? Here is how to contribute.
Questions or problems? Check the EconPapers FAQ or send mail to .
EconPapers is hosted by the
School of Business at Örebro University.