Skip to main content

Thank you for visiting You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript.

  • Letter
  • Published:

The evolution of overconfidence


Confidence is an essential ingredient of success in a wide range of domains ranging from job performance and mental health to sports, business and combat1,2,3,4. Some authors have suggested that not just confidence but overconfidence—believing you are better than you are in reality—is advantageous because it serves to increase ambition, morale, resolve, persistence or the credibility of bluffing, generating a self-fulfilling prophecy in which exaggerated confidence actually increases the probability of success3,4,5,6,7,8. However, overconfidence also leads to faulty assessments, unrealistic expectations and hazardous decisions, so it remains a puzzle how such a false belief could evolve or remain stable in a population of competing strategies that include accurate, unbiased beliefs. Here we present an evolutionary model showing that, counterintuitively, overconfidence maximizes individual fitness and populations tend to become overconfident, as long as benefits from contested resources are sufficiently large compared with the cost of competition. In contrast, unbiased strategies are only stable under limited conditions. The fact that overconfident populations are evolutionarily stable in a wide range of environments may help to explain why overconfidence remains prevalent today, even if it contributes to hubris, market bubbles, financial collapses, policy failures, disasters and costly wars9,10,11,12,13.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution

Access options

Buy this article

Prices may be subject to local taxes which are calculated during checkout

Figure 1: Best performing levels of confidence across different parameter values.

Similar content being viewed by others


  1. Kanter, R. M. Confidence: How Winning Streaks and Losing Streaks Begin and End (Crown Business, 2004)

    Google Scholar 

  2. Taylor, S. E. & Brown, J. D. Positive illusions and well-being revisited: separating fact from fiction. Psychol. Bull. 116, 21–27 (1994)

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  3. Taylor, S. E. Positive Illusions: Creative Self-Deception and the Healthy Mind (Basic Books, 1989)

    Google Scholar 

  4. Peterson, C. A Primer in Positive Psychology (Oxford Univ. Press, 2006)

    Google Scholar 

  5. Wrangham, R. W. Is military incompetence adaptive? Evol. Hum. Behav. 20, 3–17 (1999)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Trivers, R. L. The elements of a scientific theory of self-deception. Ann. NY Acad. Sci. 907, 114–131 (2000)

    Article  ADS  CAS  Google Scholar 

  7. Trivers, R. Deceit and Self-Deception: Fooling Yourself the Better to Fool Others (Allen Lane, 2011)

    Google Scholar 

  8. McKay, R. T. & Dennett, D. C. The evolution of misbelief. Behav. Brain Sci. 32, 493–510 (2009)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Tuchman, B. W. The March of Folly: From Troy to Vietnam (Alfred A. Knopf, 1984)

    Google Scholar 

  10. Camerer, C. & Lovallo, D. Overconfidence and excess entry: an experimental approach. Am. Econ. Rev. 89, 306–318 (1999)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Malmendier, U. & Tate, G. CEO overconfidence and corporate investment. J. Finance 60, 2661–2700 (2005)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Johnson, D. D. P. Overconfidence and War: The Havoc and Glory of Positive Illusions (Harvard University Press, 2004)

    Google Scholar 

  13. Johnson, D. D. P. & Tierney, D. R. The Rubicon theory of war: how the path to conflict reaches the point of no return. Int. Secur. 36, 7–40 (2011)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Sharot, T. The Optimism Bias: A Tour of The Irrationally Positive Brain (Pantheon, 2011)

    Book  Google Scholar 

  15. Johnson, D. D. P. & Levin, S. A. The tragedy of cognition: psychological biases and environmental inaction. Curr. Sci. 97, 1593–1603 (2009)

    Google Scholar 

  16. Akerlof, G. A. & Shiller, R. J. Animal Spirits: How Human Psychology Drives the Economy, and Why it Matters for Global Capitalism (Princeton Univ. Press, 2009)

    Google Scholar 

  17. Fudenberg, D. & Tirole, J. Perfect Bayesian equilibrium and sequential equilibrium. J. Econ. Theory 53, 236–260 (1991)

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  18. Gigerenzer, G. Adaptive Thinking: Rationality in the Real World (Oxford Univ. Press, 2002)

    Book  Google Scholar 

  19. Nettle, D. in Emotion, Evolution and Rationality (eds Evans, D. & Cruse, P.) 193–208 (Oxford Univ. Press, 2004)

    Book  Google Scholar 

  20. Haselton, M. G. & Nettle, D. The paranoid optimist: an integrative evolutionary model of cognitive biases. Pers. Soc. Psychol. Rev. 10, 47–66 (2006)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Cosmides, L. & Tooby, J. Better than rational: evolutionary psychology and the invisible hand. Am. Econ. Rev. 84, 327–332 (1994)

    Google Scholar 

  22. Fama, E. F. & Roll, R. Some properties of symmetric stable distributions. J. Am. Stat. Assoc. 63, 817–836 (1968)

    MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  23. Fearon, J. D. Rationalist explanations for war. Int. Organ. 49, 379–414 (1995)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Maynard Smith, J. & Parker, G. The logic of asymmetric contests. Anim. Behav. 24, 159–175 (1976)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Parker, G. A. Assessment strategy and the evolution of fighting behaviour. J. Theor. Biol. 47, 223–243 (1974)

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  26. Enquist, M. & Leimar, O. Evolution of fighting behaviour: decision rules and assessment of relative strength. J. Theor. Biol. 102, 387–410 (1983)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Nowak, M. A. Evolutionary Dynamics: Exploring the Equations of Life (Belknap Press, 2006)

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  28. Enquist, M. & Leimar, O. The evolution of fatal fighting. Anim. Behav. 39, 1–9 (1990)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Johnson, D. D. P., Weidmann, N. B. & Cederman, L.-E. Fortune favours the bold: an agent-based model reveals adaptive advantages of overconfidence in war. PLoS ONE 6, e20851 (2011)

    Article  ADS  CAS  Google Scholar 

  30. McDermott, R., Fowler, J. H. & Smirnov, O. On the evolutionary origin of prospect theory preferences. J. Polit. 70, 335–350 (2008)

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references


We thank C. Barrett, D. Blumstein, L.-E. Cederman, D. Fessler, P. Gocˇev, M. Haselton, D. Nettle, J. Orbell, K. Panchanathan, M. Price, D. Tierney, R. Trivers, N. Weidmann and R. Wrangham for discussions and help leading to this paper.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations



D.J. and J.F. conceived the study. J.F. performed the modelling. D.J. and J.F. analysed the results, revised the models and wrote the paper.

Ethics declarations

Competing interests

The authors declare no competing financial interests.

Supplementary information

Supplementary Information

This file contains Supplementary Text and Data 1-7, (see Contents for details), which includes Supplementary Figures 1-4 with legends and Supplementary Table 1. (PDF 3868 kb)

PowerPoint slides

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Johnson, D., Fowler, J. The evolution of overconfidence. Nature 477, 317–320 (2011).

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI:

This article is cited by


By submitting a comment you agree to abide by our Terms and Community Guidelines. If you find something abusive or that does not comply with our terms or guidelines please flag it as inappropriate.


Quick links

Nature Briefing

Sign up for the Nature Briefing newsletter — what matters in science, free to your inbox daily.

Get the most important science stories of the day, free in your inbox. Sign up for Nature Briefing