Joint vs. Individual performance in a dynamic choice problem

被引:0
作者
Miller, Logan [1 ]
Rholes, Ryan [2 ]
机构
[1] Univ Arkansas, Walton Coll Business, Dept Econ, Fayetteville, AR USA
[2] Univ Oxford, Dept Econ, 10 Manor Rd, Oxford, Oxon, England
关键词
Individual behavior; Group behavior; Intertemporal household choice; Life cycle models and saving; Collaborative consumption; Consumption; Saving; Wealth; PERMANENT INCOME HYPOTHESIS; DECISION-MAKING; 2; HEADS; CONSUMPTION; UNCERTAINTY; POVERTY; TEAM; RISK; PLAY;
D O I
10.1016/j.jebo.2023.05.022
中图分类号
F [经济];
学科分类号
02 ;
摘要
This paper compares the relative ability of individuals and pairs to solve a finite, stochas-tic lifecycle problem that requires borrowing and saving to achieve the rational bench-mark. We find that pairs significantly outperform individuals, especially when allowing subjects to account for past mistakes along conditionally-optimal consumption paths. Joint decision-makers out-earn individuals by about 23%. Though pairs and individuals both overreact to income and wealth balances, these distortions are twice as large for indi-viduals. Analyzing chat data reveals that pairs bargain to balance idiosyncratic consump-tion preferences, which reduces consumption errors. We estimate consumption heuristics at the observation level and study their dynamics. We show that about half our subjects (or pairs of subjects) stick to heuristics for the majority of the experiment. These 'stable' subjects significantly outperform their 'unstable' counterparts in the dynamic optimization task. Finally, we provide suggestive evidence that subjects who have a nuanced view of debt outperform subjects who think of debt as always bad, even after controlling for cog-nitive ability.& COPY; 2023 The Authors. Published by Elsevier B.V. This is an open access article under the CC BY license ( http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ )
引用
收藏
页码:897 / 934
页数:38
相关论文
共 50 条
[21]   Effects of information load on response times in frogs and bats: mate choice vs. prey choice [J].
Hemingway, Claire T. ;
Lea, Amanda M. ;
Page, Rachel A. ;
Ryan, Michael J. .
BEHAVIORAL ECOLOGY AND SOCIOBIOLOGY, 2019, 73 (08)
[22]   Effects of information load on response times in frogs and bats: mate choice vs. prey choice [J].
Claire T. Hemingway ;
Amanda M. Lea ;
Rachel A. Page ;
Michael J. Ryan .
Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology, 2019, 73
[23]   The effect of culture on consumer choice: the need for conformity vs. the need for uniqueness [J].
Liang, Beichen ;
He, Yanbin .
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF CONSUMER STUDIES, 2012, 36 (03) :352-359
[24]   Individual vs. Aggregate Preferences: The Case of a Small Fish in a Big Pond [J].
Blackburn, Douglas W. ;
Ukhov, Andrey D. .
MANAGEMENT SCIENCE, 2013, 59 (02) :470-484
[25]   Optimal technology choice and investment timing: A stochastic model of industrial cogeneration vs. heat-only production [J].
Wickart, Marcel ;
Madlener, Reinhard .
ENERGY ECONOMICS, 2007, 29 (04) :934-952
[26]   Time Matters Less When Outcomes Differ: Unimodal vs. Cross-Modal Comparisons in Intertemporal Choice [J].
Cubitt, Robin ;
McDonald, Rebecca ;
Read, Daniel .
MANAGEMENT SCIENCE, 2018, 64 (02) :873-887
[27]   Eye movements in binary food choice context: assessing the complexity of restaurant menus on virtue vs. vice foods [J].
Ladeira, Wagner Junior ;
Balaji, M. S. ;
Rasul, Tareq ;
Santini, Fernando de Oliveira ;
Zanoni, Roberto ;
Rufato, Juliane ;
Akhtar, Shakeb .
TOURISM RECREATION RESEARCH, 2024,
[28]   General Population vs. Patient Preferences in Anticoagulant Therapy: A Discrete Choice Experiment [J].
Najafzadeh, Mehdi ;
Schneeweiss, Sebastian ;
Choudhry, Niteesh K. ;
Avorn, Jerry ;
Gagne, Joshua J. .
PATIENT-PATIENT CENTERED OUTCOMES RESEARCH, 2019, 12 (02) :235-246
[29]   The Cognitive and Affective Empathy of Doctor of Physical Therapy Students vs. Specialty Choice [J].
Newton, Bruce W. ;
Green, Michelle ;
Vaskalis, Zachary .
INTERNET JOURNAL OF ALLIED HEALTH SCIENCES AND PRACTICE, 2024, 22 (03)
[30]   On static vs. dynamic line ratings in renewable energy zones [J].
Simshauser, Paul .
ENERGY ECONOMICS, 2024, 129