Doing It Now or Later

1999 ◽  
Vol 89 (1) ◽  
pp. 103-124 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ted O'Donoghue ◽  
Matthew Rabin
Keyword(s):  
Self Control ◽  
Control Problems ◽  
Present Bias ◽  
Future Self ◽  
Time Inconsistent

We examine self-control problems—modeled as time-inconsistent, present-biased preferences—in a model where a person must do an activity exactly once. We emphasize two distinctions: Do activities involve immediate costs or immediate rewards, and are people sophisticated or naive about future self-control problems? Naive people procrastinate immediate-cost activities and preproperate—do too soon—immediate-reward activities. Sophistication mitigates procrastination, but exacerbates preproperation. Moreover, with immediate costs, a small present bias can severely harm only naive people, whereas with immediate rewards it can severely harm only sophisticated people. Lessons for savings, addiction, and elsewhere are discussed. (JEL A12, B49, C70, D11, D60, D74, D91, E21)

scholarly journals Government Policy with Time Inconsistent Voters

2015 ◽  
Vol 105 (6) ◽  
pp. 1711-1737 ◽  
Author(s):  
Alberto Bisin ◽  
Alessandro Lizzeri ◽  
Leeat Yariv
Keyword(s):  
Behavioral Economics ◽  
Government Policy ◽  
Public Debt ◽  
Government Debt ◽  
Self Control ◽  
Control Problems ◽  
Debt Accumulation ◽  
Balanced Budget ◽  
Time Inconsistent ◽  
Illiquid Assets

Behavioral economics presents a “paternalistic” rationale for benevolent government intervention. This paper presents a model of public debt where voters have self-control problems and attempt to commit using illiquid assets. In equilibrium, government accumulates debt to respond to individuals' desire to undo their commitments, which leads individuals to rebalance their portfolio, in turn feeding into a demand for further debt accumulation. As a consequence, (i) large (and distortionary) government debt accumulation occurs, and (ii) banning illiquid assets could improve individuals' welfare. These results offer a new rationale for balanced budget rules in constitutions to restrain governments' responses to voters' self-control problems.(JEL D2, D72, D78, H62, H63)

scholarly journals Self-Control and Demand for Preventive Health: Evidence from Hypertension in India

2020 ◽  
pp. 1-55
Author(s):  
Liang Bai ◽  
Benjamin Handel ◽  
Edward Miguel ◽  
Gautam Rao
Keyword(s):  
Low Income ◽  
Preventive Health ◽  
Self Control ◽  
Low Income Countries ◽  
Control Problems ◽  
Doctor Visit ◽  
Present Bias ◽  
Doctor Visits ◽  
Commitment Devices ◽  
Number Of Individuals

Self-control problems constitute a potential explanation for the under-investment in preventive health in low-income countries. Behavioral economics offers a tool to solve such problems: commitment devices. We conduct a field experiment to evaluate the effectiveness of different types of theoretically-motivated commitment contracts in increasing preventive doctor visits by hypertensive patients in rural India. Despite achieving high take-up of such contracts in some treatment arms, we find no effects on actual doctor visits or individual health outcomes. A substantial number of individuals pay for commitment but fail to follow through on the doctor visit, losing money without experiencing health benefits. We develop and structurally estimate a pre-specified model of consumer behavior under present bias with varying levels of naivete. The results are consistent with a large share of individuals being partially naive about their own self-control problems: sophisticated enough to demand some commitment, but overly optimistic about whether a given level of commitment is sufficiently strong to be effective. The results suggest that commitment devices may in practice be welfare diminishing, at least in some contexts, and serve as a cautionary tale about their role in health care.

Self-Control Problems Measure

2011 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kevin M. King ◽  
Charles B. Fleming ◽  
Kathryn C. Monahan ◽  
Richard F. Catalano
Keyword(s):  
Self Control ◽  
Control Problems

Letters to our Future Selves? High-Powered Replication Attempts Question Effects on Future Orientation, Delinquent Decisions, and Risky Investments

2020 ◽  
Vol 38 (6) ◽  
pp. 521-554
Author(s):  
Laura Quinten ◽  
Anja Murmann ◽  
Hanna A. Genau ◽  
Rafaela Warkentin ◽  
Rainer Banse
Keyword(s):  
Problem Behavior ◽  
Related Problem ◽  
Future Orientation ◽  
Self Control ◽  
Sample Sizes ◽  
Replication Studies ◽  
Future Selves ◽  
The Future ◽  
Future Self ◽  
Letter Task

Enhancing people's future orientation, in particular continuity with their future selves, has been proposed as promising to mitigate self-control–related problem behavior. In two pre-registered, direct replication studies, we tested a subtle manipulation, that is, writing a letter to one's future self, in order to reduce delinquent decisions (van Gelder et al., 2013, Study 1) and risky investments (Monroe et al., 2017, Study 1). With samples of n = 314 and n = 463, which is 2.5 times the original studies' sample sizes, the results suggested that the expected effects are either non-existent or smaller than originally reported, and/or dependent on factors not examined. Vividness of the future self was successfully manipulated in Study 2, but manipulation checks overall indicated that the letter task is not reliable to alter future orientation. We discuss ideas to integrate self-affirmation approaches and to test less subtle manipulations in samples with substantial, myopia-related self-control deficits.

Self-Control, Cooperation, and Intention’s Authority

2020 ◽  
pp. 315-333
Author(s):  
Lilian O’Brien
Keyword(s):  
Cooperative Behavior ◽  
Self Control ◽  
The Future ◽  
Future Self

In this chapter the author defends a novel view of the relationships among intention for the future, self-control, and cooperation. The author argues that when an agent forms an intention for the future she comes to regard herself as criticizable if she does not act in accordance with her intention. In contexts where the agent has inclinations that run contrary to her unrescinded intention, her disposition for reflexive criticism helps her to resist these inclinations. Such intentions have, the author argues, a built-in mechanism for exercising self-control. The author goes on to argue that this mechanism can also function as a mechanism for cooperative behavior. Agents are not just equipped to abide by plans for the future, they are also thereby equipped for exercising self-control and for cooperating.

Values Activation and Present Bias

2020 ◽  
Vol 9 (2) ◽  
pp. 57-69
Author(s):  
Onna Brewer ◽  
Orhan Erdem
Keyword(s):  
College Students ◽  
Decision Making ◽  
Experimental Study ◽  
Health Outcomes ◽  
Self Control ◽  
Future Research ◽  
Values Clarification ◽  
Research And Practice ◽  
Present Bias ◽  
Writing Activity

Present bias—difficulty resisting instant gratification over a future and larger reward (also called delay discounting)—has been associated with various suboptimal behaviors and health outcomes. Several methods have been proposed to produce reductions in this bias and promote self-control. In this randomized experimental study of 137 undergraduate college students, the authors examined the effect of a 10-minute values clarification writing exercise on present bias in a monetary decision-making task compared with a neutral writing activity. While participants in the values clarification condition showed less present-biased behavior, this finding was not statistically significant at the .05 level. Thus, they place emphasis on implications for future research and practice with the aims of reducing present bias and building better communities.

scholarly journals Self-nudging and the citizen choice architect

2020 ◽  
pp. 1-31 ◽  
Author(s):  
SAMULI REIJULA ◽  
RALPH HERTWIG
Keyword(s):  
Goal Attainment ◽  
Behavioral Science ◽  
Personal Autonomy ◽  
Cost Effective ◽  
The Self ◽  
Self Control ◽  
Control Problems ◽  
Policy Makers ◽  
The Public ◽  
Scope Of Application

Abstract This article argues that nudges can often be turned into self-nudges: empowering interventions that enable people to design and structure their own decision environments – that is, to act as citizen choice architects. Self-nudging applies insights from behavioral science in a way that is practicable and cost-effective, but that sidesteps concerns about paternalism or manipulation. It has the potential to expand the scope of application of behavioral insights from the public to the personal sphere (e.g., homes, offices, families). It is a tool for reducing failures of self-control and enhancing personal autonomy; specifically, self-nudging can mean designing one's proximate choice architecture to alleviate the effects of self-control problems, engaging in education to understand the nature and causes of self-control problems and employing simple educational nudges to improve goal attainment in various domains. It can even mean self-paternalistic interventions such as winnowing down one's choice set by, for instance, removing options. Policy-makers could promote self-nudging by sharing knowledge about nudges and how they work. The ultimate goal of the self-nudging approach is to enable citizen choice architects’ efficient self-governance, where reasonable, and the self-determined arbitration of conflicts between their mutually exclusive goals and preferences.

Learning to cooperate: Reciprocity and self-control

2002 ◽  
Vol 25 (2) ◽  
pp. 256-257 ◽  
Author(s):  
Peter Danielson
Keyword(s):  
Prisoner's Dilemma ◽  
Prisoner’S Dilemma ◽  
Self Control ◽  
Strong Sense ◽  
Control Problems ◽  
Essential Difference ◽  
Parallel Learning ◽  
Learning Agent

Using a simple learning agent, we show that learning self-control in the primrose path experiment does parallel learning cooperation in the prisoner's dilemma. But Rachlin's claim that “there is no essential difference between self-control and altruism” is too strong. Only iterated prisoner's dilemmas played against reciprocators are reduced to self-control problems. There is more to cooperation than self-control and even altruism in a strong sense.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document