Life expectancy as a constructed belief: Evidence of a live-to or die-by framing effect
- 1.1k Downloads
Life expectations are essential inputs for many important personal decisions. We propose that longevity beliefs are responses constructed at the time of judgment, subject to irrelevant task and context factors, and leading to predictable biases. Specifically, we examine whether life expectancy is affected by the framing of expectations questions as either live-to or die-by, as well as by factors that actually affect longevity such as age, gender, and self-reported health. We find that individuals in a live-to frame report significantly higher chances of being alive at ages 55 through 95 than people in a corresponding die-by frame. Estimated mean life expectancies across three studies and 2300 respondents were 7.38 to 9.17 years longer when solicited in a live-to frame. We are additionally able to show how this framing works on a process level and how it affects preference for life annuities. Implications for models of financial decision making are discussed.
KeywordsLife Expectancy Framing Effects Judgment Annuities
JEL ClassificationD03 – Behavioral Economics D84 – Expectations
- Brenner, L., Koehler, D. J., & Rottenstreich, Y. (2002). Remarks on support theory: Recent advances and future directions. In T. Gilovich, D. Griffin, & D. Kahneman (Eds.), Heuristics and biases: The psychology of intuitive judgment (pp. 489–509). New York: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Brown, J.R., Kapteyn, A., & Mitchell, O.S. (2011). Framing effects and expected social security claiming behavior. NBER Working Paper 17018.Google Scholar
- Elder, T. E. (2007). Subjective survival probabilities in the health and retirement study: Systematic biases and predictive validity. Working Paper 2007–159, Michigan Retirement Research Center.Google Scholar
- Goodman, B., & Heller, M. (2006). Annuities: Now, later, never? TIAA-CREF White Paper.Google Scholar
- Hu, H.T., & Odean, T. (2011). Paying for old age. New York Times 2/25/2011.Google Scholar
- Keren, G. (2011). On the definition and possible underpinnings of framing effects: A brief review and a critical evaluation. In G. Keren (Ed.), Perspectives on framing. New York: Psychology Press.Google Scholar
- Ludwig, A., & Zimper, A. (2007). A parsimonious model of subjective life expectancy. Working paper 154–2007, University of Mannheim Research Institute for the Economics of Aging.Google Scholar
- Schultz, E. (2010). Pensions: The lump-sum gamble. November 27: The Wall Street Journal.Google Scholar
- Thaler, R. H., & Sunstein, C. R. (2008). Nudge: improving decisions about health, wealth and happiness. New Haven: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
- Weller, J., Dieckmann, N. F., Tusler, M., Mertz, C. K., & Peters, E. (2012). Development and testing of an abbreviated numeracy scale: A rasch analysis approach. Journal of Behavioral Decision Making. doi: 10.1002/bdm.1751.
- Zhao, X., Lynch, Jr., J. G., & Chen, Q. (2010). Reconsidering Baron and Kenny: Myths and truths about mediation analysis. Journal of Consumer Research, 37, 197–206.Google Scholar