Researchers have long maintained the importance of individual differences in motivational orientations for understanding personality and behavior. Recent findings suggest that strengthening and integrating four different motives in particular may make us better decision makers and more effective at achieving our goals.
Heuristics play an important role in daily judgments and decision-making, but a scientific debate has been ongoing as to whether heuristics result in systematic errors or make us smarter. Both approaches have resulted in tools to support decision-making. Nudges address systematic errors and biases, while boosts support informed decision-making under uncertainty. But can these two opposing approaches be integrated into one framework?
New research shows that being similar to a previous winner can have radically different effects on people’s participation likelihood in sweepstakes – it all depends on the attributions people make for the winning outcome.
A frequent misconception we hold is believing that what makes food healthy or unhealthy is the number of calories it contains. We know that soda is unhealthy and has a lot of calories and that chamomile infusion is healthy and does not have a lot of calories.
People's failure to act is an important problem discussed in behavioral economics and finance. But inappropriate action can also be detrimental. Find out more about the action bias in this post.
By Nathan Maddix Can Nudging Overcome Physics Envy? As is now well-known, tremendous results have been found for nudges – behavioral interventions designed to facilitate choice for welfare-promoting outcomes. In my work over the last 5 years, I have sought not only to design and administer nudges, but also to understand how economists and [...]
What goes through your head when choosing between different payment options?
Stocks yield much higher returns than bonds and other riskless securities. In fact, in the last 100 years US equities have seen an 8% average annual real return, compared to only a 1% return for more riskless securities. This gap is called the equity premium puzzle – why are equities valued so much higher than securities? One behavioral theory attributes the equity premium puzzle to what’s known as myopic loss aversion (MLA) – the idea that loss-averse investors (as all investors are) take too short-term a view of their investments, leading them to react overly negatively to short-term losses. We designed the first natural field experimental evidence to show that MLA exists for professional traders.
Despite good intentions, environmentally friendly attitudes do not always translate into corresponding food choices (the so-called intention-behavior gap). To investigate the potential benefits of behavioral nudges, the Flemish government’s Environmental, Nature and Energy Department, together with its partners, conducted tests in several retail locations. The results of our research are reported in this post.
Applications of behavioural knowledge could play a crucial role in improving corporate decision-making
