Advertisement

Marketing Letters

, Volume 16, Issue 3–4, pp 443–454 | Cite as

Psychology, Behavioral Economics, and Public Policy

  • On Amir
  • Dan Ariely
  • Alan Cooke
  • David Dunning
  • Nicholas Epley
  • Uri Gneezy
  • Botond Koszegi
  • Donald Lichtenstein
  • Nina Mazar
  • Sendhil Mullainathan
  • Drazen Prelec
  • Eldar Shafir
  • Jose Silva
Article

Abstract

Economics has typically been the social science of choice to inform public policy and policymakers. In the current paper we contemplate the role behavioral science can play in enlightening policymakers. In particular, we provide some examples of research that has and can be used to inform policy, reflect on the kind of behavioral science that is important for policy, and approaches for convincing policy-makers to listen to behavioral scientists. We suggest that policymakers are unlikely to invest the time translating behavioral research into its policy implications, and researchers interested in influencing public policy must therefore invest substantial effort, and direct that effort differently than in standard research practices.

Keywords

public policy psychology behavioral economics 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Amir, O. and D. Ariely. (2004). “The Pain of Deciding: Indecision, Procrastination, and Consumer Choice Online.” Unpublished manuscript.Google Scholar
  2. Amir, O., D. Ariely, and Z. Carmon. (2005). “The Locus and Appropriateness of Monetary Evaluations: Why Monetary Assessments do not Reflect Predicted Utility,” Unpublished manuscript.Google Scholar
  3. Ando, A. and F. Modigliani. (1963). “The ‘Life Cycle’ Hypothesis of Saving: Aggregate Implications and Tests,”American Economic Review 53, 55–84.Google Scholar
  4. Ariely, D., B. Koszegi, and N. Mazar. (2004). “Price-Sensitive Preferences,” Unpublished manuscript.Google Scholar
  5. Ariely, D. and G. Loewenstein. (forthcoming). “In the Heat of the Moment The Effect of Sexual Arousal on Sexual Decision Making,” Journal of Behavioral Decision Making.Google Scholar
  6. Benartzi, S. and R. Thaler. (2004). “Save More Tomorrow: Using Behavioral Economics in Increase Employee Savings,”Journal of Political Economy 112(1), 164–187.Google Scholar
  7. Carver, Charles S. and Michael F. Scheier. (1998). On the self-Regulation of Behavior. New York, NY, USA: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  8. Duflo, E., M. Kremer, and J. Robinson. (2005). “Understanding Technology Adoption: Fertilizer in Western Kenya, Preliminary Results from Field Experiments,” Working paper MITGoogle Scholar
  9. Duval, Shelley and Robert A. Wicklund. (1972). A Theory of Objective Self Awareness. New York, NY, USA: Academic Press.Google Scholar
  10. Epley, N., L. Idson, and D. Mak. (2004). “Rebate or Bonus? The Impact of Income Framing on Spending and Saving.” Unpublished manuscript.Google Scholar
  11. Epley, N. and T. Gilovich. (2001, Sep). “Putting Adjustment Back in the Anchoring and Adjustment Heuristic: Differential Processing of Self-Generated and Experimenter-Provided Anchors,”Psychological Science 391–396.Google Scholar
  12. Fish, S. (2004). Why We Built the Ivory Tower. The New York Times, May 21st.Google Scholar
  13. Huber, J., J. Payne, and C. Puto. (1982). “Adding Asymmetrically Dominated Alternatives: Violations of Regularity and the Similarity Hypothesis,”Journal of Consumer Research (pre-1986) 9(1), 90.Google Scholar
  14. Huberman, G., S. Iyengar, and W. Jiang. (2003). “Defined Contribution Pension Plans: Determinants of Participation and Contribution Rates.” Working paper, Columbia Business School.Google Scholar
  15. Iyengar, S. S. and M. R. Lepper. (2000). “When Choice is Demotivating: Can One Desire too Much of a Good Thing?”Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 79(6), 995–1006.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Johnson, E. J. and D. Goldstein. (2003, Nov 21). “Do Defaults Save Lives?”Science 1338–1339.Google Scholar
  17. Jolls, C. and C. R. Sunstein. (2004). “Debiasing Through Law”. Unpublished manuscript.Google Scholar
  18. Kahneman, D. and A. Tversky. (1979). “Prospect Theory: An Analysis of Decisions Under Risk,”Econometrica 47, 263–291.Google Scholar
  19. Laibson, D. (1997). “Golden Eggs and Hyperbolic Discounting,”Quarterly Journal of Economics 62, (May), 443–477.Google Scholar
  20. Lindsay, R. C. L. and G. L. Wells. (1985). “Improving Eyewitness Identification from Lineups: Simultaneous Versus Sequential Lineup Presentations,”Journal of Applied Psychology 70, 556–564.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Loewenstein, G. (1996). “Out of Control: Visceral Influences on Behavior,”Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes 272.Google Scholar
  22. Loewenstein, G. F., C. K. Hsee, E. U. Weber, and N. Welsh. (2001). “Risk as Feelings,”Psychological Bulletin 267–286.Google Scholar
  23. Mazar, Nina, On Amir, and Dan Ariely. (2005). “Almost Honest: Internal and External Motives for Honesty,”MIT Sloan School of Management.Google Scholar
  24. Russo, E. J., V. H. Medvec, and M. G. Meloy. (1996). “The Distortion of Information During Decisions,”Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes 66(1), 102–110.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Samuelson, W. and R. J. Zeckhauser. (1988). “Status Quo Bias in Decision Making,”Journal of Risk and Uncertainty 1(March), 7–59.Google Scholar
  26. Simonson, I. (1989). “Choice Based On Reasons: The Case Of Attraction And Comprom,”Journal of Consumer Research 16(2), 158.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Simonson, I. and A. Tversky, (1992). “Choice in Context: Tradeoff Contrast and Extremeness Aversion,”Journal of Marketing Research 29(3), 281–295.Google Scholar
  28. Slovic, P., M. Finucane, E. Peters, and D. G. MacGregor. (2002). “The Affect Heuristic.” In T. Gilovich (ed.), Heuristics and Biases: The Psychology of Intuitive Judgment. New York, NY, US: Cambridge University Press pp. 397–420 .Google Scholar
  29. Slovic, P., D. Griffin, and A. Tversky. (2002). “Compatibility Effects in Judgment and Choice,”In T. Gilovich (ed.), Heuristics and Biases: The Psychology of Intuitive Judgment. New York, NY, US: Cambridge University Press pp. 217–229.Google Scholar
  30. Sunstein, C. R. (2000). Behavioral Law and Economics. (ed.), Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  31. Thaler, R. H. and H. M. Shefrin. (1981). “An Economic Theory of Self-Control,”Journal of Political Economy 89(April), 392–406.Google Scholar
  32. Turtle, J. W., R. C. L. Lindsay, and G. L. Wells. (2003). “Best Practice Recommendations for Eyewitness Evidence Procedures: New Ideas for the Oldest Way to Solve a Case,”The Canadian Journal of Police and Security Services 1, 5–18.Google Scholar
  33. Tversky, A. and D. Kahneman. (1981). “The Framing of Decisions and the Psychology of Choice,”Science 211(4481), 453–458.Google Scholar
  34. Tversky, A. and D. Kahneman. (1974). “Judgment Under Uncertainty: Heuristics and Biases,”Science 185, 1124–1131.Google Scholar
  35. Tversky, A., S. Sattath, and P. Slovic. (1988). “Contingent Weighting in Judgment and Choice,”Psychological Review 95(3), 371–384.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Wells, G. L., R. S. Malpass, R. C. L. Lindsay, R. P. Fisher, J. W. Turtle, and S. Fulero. (2000). “From the Lab to the Police Station: A Successful Application of Eyewitness Research,”American Psychologist 55, 581–598.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Zimbardo, P. G. (1971). The power and pathology of imprisonment. Congressional Record. (Serial No. 15, October 25, 1971). Hearings before Subcommittee No. 3, of the Committee on the Judiciary, House of Representatives, Ninety-Second Congress, First Session on Corrections, Part II, Prisons, Prison Reform and Prisoner's Rights: California. Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science + Business Media, Inc. 2005

Authors and Affiliations

  • On Amir
    • 1
  • Dan Ariely
    • 2
  • Alan Cooke
    • 3
  • David Dunning
    • 4
  • Nicholas Epley
    • 5
  • Uri Gneezy
    • 5
  • Botond Koszegi
    • 6
  • Donald Lichtenstein
    • 7
  • Nina Mazar
    • 2
  • Sendhil Mullainathan
    • 8
  • Drazen Prelec
    • 2
  • Eldar Shafir
    • 9
  • Jose Silva
    • 6
  1. 1.Yale UniversityNew Haven
  2. 2.MITChicago
  3. 3.University of Florida
  4. 4.Cornell UniversityUSA
  5. 5.University of ChicagoChicago
  6. 6.University of CaliforniaBerkeley
  7. 7.University of ColoradoBoulder
  8. 8.Harvard UniversityUSA
  9. 9.Princeton University

Personalised recommendations