Though economists assume that intertemporal preferences are time-consistent, evidence suggests that a person 's relative preference for well-being at an earlier moment over a later moment increases as the earlier moment gets closer. We explore the behavioral and welfare implications of such time-inconsistent preferences in a simple model where a person must engage in an activity exactly once during some duration. We focus on two sets of distinctions. First, do choices involve salient costs # where the costs of an action are immediate but any rewards are delayed # or do they involve salient rewards # where the rewards of an action are immediate but any costs are delayed? Second, are people sophisticated #theyforesee future self-control problems # or are they naive # they do not anticipate these self-control problems? Naive people procrastinate activities with salient costs and preproperate #dotoo soon # activities with salient rewards. If costs are salient, sophistication mitigates procrastination, and can even lead sophisticated people to do the activity sooner than if they had no self-control problem . If rewards are salient, sophistication exacerbates preproperation. These behavioral results have corresponding welfare implications: With salient costs, mild self-control problems can severely damage a person only if she is naive, while with salient rewards mild self-control problems can severely damage a person only if she is sophisticated. We also consider a multiple-activity version of the model, and discuss how our results might apply to savings, addiction, and other behaviors. Keywords: Doing It, Hyperbolic Discounting, Preproperation, Procrastination, Time Inconsistency. JEL Classifications: A12, B49, C70, D11, D60, D74, D91, E21 Acknowledgments: We thank Steven Bl...

Abstract not found

Mental accounting is the set of cognitive operations used by individuals and households to organize, evaluate, and keep track of financial activities. Making use of research on this topic over the past decade, this paper summarizes the current state of our knowledge about how people engage in mental accounting activities. Three components of mental accounting receive the most attention. This first captures how outcomes are perceived and experienced, and how decisions are made and subsequently evaluated. The accounting system provides the inputs to be both ex ante and ex post cost-benefit analyses. A second component of mental accounting involves the assignment of activities to specific accounts. Both the sources and uses of funds are labeled in real as well as in mental accounting systems. Expenditures are grouped into categories (housing, food, etc.) and spending is sometimes constrained by implicit or explicit budgets. The third component of mental accounting concerns the frequency with which accounts are evaluated and 'choice bracketing'. Accounts can be balanced daily,

Early studies of intuitive judgment and decision making conducted with the late Amos Tversky are reviewed in the context of two related concepts: an analysis of accessibility, the ease with which thoughts come to mind; a distinction between effortless intuition and deliberate reasoning. Intuitive thoughts, like percepts, are highly accessible. Determinants and consequences of accessibility help explain the central results of prospect theory, framing effects, the heuristic process of attribute substitution, and the characteristic biases that result from the substitution of nonextensional for extensional attributes. Variations in the accessibility of rules explain the occasional corrections of intuitive judgments. The study of biases is compatible with a view of intuitive thinking and decision making as generally skilled and successful.

This paper analyzes the impact of automatic enrollment on 401(k) savings behavior. We have two key findings. First, 401(k) participation is significantly higher under automatic enrollment. Second, a substantial fraction of 401(k) participants hired under automatic enrollment retain both the default contribution rate and fund allocation even though few employees hired before automatic enrollment picked this particular outcome. This “default ” behavior appears to result from participant inertia and from employee perceptions of the default as investment advice. These findings have implications for the design of 401(k) savings plans as well as for any type of Social Security reform that includes personal accounts over which individuals have control. They also shed light more generally on the importance of both economic and noneconomic (behavioral) factors in the determination of individual savings behavior.

ly on the accuracy of the prediction; errors in predicting feelings are measured in units of divorce, dropout, career burnout and consumer dissatisfaction. The accuracy of people's predictions of their own feelings is important not only for individual well-being but, increasingly, also for public policy. Recent decades have seen an expansion of 1 attempts to base public policies on measurements of public values. The best-known of such efforts is Oregon's experiment in health-care rationing, but attempts to base public policy on public values have been made in diverse areas, such as transportation safety and environmental policy Measurement of public values typically involves surveys in which respondents are asked 2 to predict how they would feel if they were in health conditions or environmental states different from the ones they are in. The meaningfulness of the measured values, and the optimality of the policies based on them, therefore, depend, in

We develop a theory in which the decision to pay dividends is driven by investor demand. Managers cater to investors by paying dividends when investors put a stock price premium on payers and not paying when investors prefer nonpayers. To test this prediction, we construct four time series measures of the investor demand for dividend payers. By each measure, nonpayers initiate dividends when demand for payers is high. By some measures, payers omit dividends when demand is low. Further analysis confirms that the results are better explained by the catering theory than other theories of dividends.

Why do economists conduct experiments? To answer that question, it is first necessary briefly to specify the ingredients of an experiment. Every laboratory experiment is defined by an environment, specifying the initial endowments, preferences and costs that motivate exchange. This environment is controlled using monetary rewards to induce the desired specific value/cost configuration (Smith, 1991, 6). 1 An experiment also uses an institution defining the language (messages) of market communication (bids, offers, acceptances), the rules that govern the exchange of information, and the rules under which messages become binding contracts. This institution is defined by the experimental instructions which describe the messages and procedures of the market, which are most often computer controlled. Finally, there is the observed behavior of the participants in the experiments as a function of the environment and institution that constitute the controlled variables. Using this framework of environment, institution, and behavior, I can think of at least seven prominent reasons in the literature as to why economists conduct experiments. Undoubtedly, there are more (Davis and Holt, 1992, chapter 1 and passim).

Security is both a feeling and a reality. And they’re not the same. The reality of security is mathematical, based on the probability of different risks and the effectiveness of different countermeasures. We can calculate how secure your home is from burglary, based on such factors as the crime rate in the

of the process) for helpful comments. 1 Behavioral economics increases the explanatory power of economics by providing it with more realistic psychological foundations. This book consists of representative recent articles in behavioral economics. 1 This chapter is intended to provide an introduction to the approach and methods of behavioral economics, and to some of its major findings, applications, and promising new directions. It also seeks to fill some unavoidable gaps in the chapters ’ coverage of topics. What Behavioral Economics Tries To Do At the core of behavioral economics is the conviction that increasing the realism of the psychological underpinnings of economic analysis will improve economics on its own terms--generating theoretical insights, making better predictions of field phenomena, and suggesting better policy. This conviction does not imply a wholesale rejection of the neoclassical approach to economics based on utility maximization, equilibrium, and efficiency. The neoclassical approach is useful because it provides economists with a theoretical framework that can be applied to almost any form of economic (and even non-economic) behavior, and it makes refutable predictions. Many of these predictions are tested in the chapters of this book, and rejections of those predictions suggest new theories. Most of the papers modify one or two assumptions in standard theory in the direction of greater psychological realism. Often these departures are not radical at all because they relax simplifying assumptions that are not central to the economic approach. For example, there is nothing in core neoclassical theory that specifies that people should not care about fairness, that they should weight risky outcomes in a linear fashion, or that they must discount the future exponentially at a constant rate. 2 Other assumptions simply acknowledge human limits on 1 Since it is a book of advances, many of the seminal articles which influenced those collected here are not included, but are noted below and are widely reprinted elsewhere.