nep-cbe New Economics Papers
on Cognitive and Behavioural Economics
Issue of 2022‒05‒09
six papers chosen by
Marco Novarese
Università degli Studi del Piemonte Orientale

  1. Pledges and how social influence shapes their effectiveness By Koessler, Ann Kathrin
  2. How Does Group-Decision Making Affect Subsequent Individual Behavior? By Philipp Dörrenberg; Christoph Feldhaus
  3. Endogenous Risk Attitudes By Nick Netzer; Arthur Robson; Jakub Steiner; Pavel Kocourek
  4. Time and Risk Preferences of Children Predict Health Behaviors but not BMI By Greta List; John List; Lina Ramirez; Anya Samek
  5. Dual humanness and trust in conversational AI : A person-centered approach By Peng Hu; Yaobin Lu; Yeming Gong
  6. How Does the Vaccine Approval Procedure Affect Covid-19 Vaccination Intentions? By Silvia Angerer; Daniela Glätzle-Rützler; Philipp Lergetporer; Thomas Rittmannsberger

  1. By: Koessler, Ann Kathrin
    Abstract: Pledges are used to signal the intention to act in a socially desirable way. In this study, we examine what role social influence plays in the decision to pledge. In a laboratory experiment, subjects can make a pledge to contribute to a public good in the socially optimal way. Across treatment conditions, we vary the way in which the pledges are elicited. Hence, the degree of social influence on pledge-making is manipulated and its impact can be examined. We find that when individuals are aware that the majority of other subjects decided to pledge, they are likely to conform and also make the pledge. The emergence of such a critical mass can be stimulated by (institutional) design, namely by determining the elicitation order on the basis of previous behavior. Overall, this commitment nudge is effective. Both socially-oriented and previously not socially-oriented subjects modify their behavior after the pledge.
    Keywords: commitment; conformity; pledgeability; promise; public good; social dilemma; social influence
    JEL: A13 C71 C91 H41
    Date: 2022–06–01
  2. By: Philipp Dörrenberg; Christoph Feldhaus
    Abstract: Do groups and individuals behave differently in dictator games with varying deservingness of the recipient? Does the involvement in group-decision making affect the decisions of group members in subsequent individual decisions? We address these questions using a controlled dictator-game experiment and find the following main results. First, groups and individuals are not different w.r.t. their dictator-game decisions and recipient deservingness does not have a different effect on groups than on individuals. Second, participants who were previously part of a group decision process are more generous in a subsequent individual-level decision than participants who previously made individual decisions. We exploit the chat protocols of group discussions to shed light on the mechanism behind this result. Consistent with moral balancing, we show that the effect of group-decision making on subsequent individual decisions is driven by subjects who intent to make good for the initial group decision.
    Keywords: group-decision making, dictator game, recipient deservingness, moral balancing
    JEL: C91 C92 D91
    Date: 2022
  3. By: Nick Netzer; Arthur Robson; Jakub Steiner; Pavel Kocourek
    Abstract: In a model inspired by neuroscience, we show that constrained optimal perception encodes lottery rewards using an S-shaped encoding function and over-samples low-probability events. The implications of this perception strategy for behavior depend on the decision-maker’s understanding of the risk. The strategy does not distort choice in the limit as perception frictions vanish when the decision-maker fully understands the decision problem. If, however, the decision-maker underrates the complexity of the decision problem, then risk attitudes reflect properties of the perception strategy even for vanishing perception frictions. The model explains adaptive risk attitudes and probability weighting as in prospect theory and, additionally, predicts that risk attitudes are strengthened by time pressure and attenuated by anticipation of large risks.
    Keywords: endogenous preferences, probability distortions, misspecified learning
    JEL: D81 D87 D91
    Date: 2022
  4. By: Greta List; John List; Lina Ramirez; Anya Samek
    Abstract: We conduct experiments with 720 children ages 9-11 to evaluate the relationship of time and risk preferences with health. Children who are more patient report consuming fewer unhealthy calories and spending less time on sedentary activities such as video games. Children who are more risk seeking report engaging in more exercise and more screen time. However, time and risk preferences are not predictive of body mass index (BMI). Moreover, some of the negative health behaviors, such as screen time, are associated with lower - rather than higher - BMI.
    Date: 2022
  5. By: Peng Hu (emlyon business school); Yaobin Lu; Yeming Gong
    Abstract: Conversational Artificial Intelligence (AI) is digital agents that interact with users by natural language. To advance the understanding of trust in conversational AI, this study focused on two humanness factors manifested by conversational AI: speaking and listening. First, we explored users' heterogeneous perception patterns based on the two humanness factors. Next, we examined how this heterogeneity relates to trust in conversational AI. A two-stage survey was conducted to collect data. Latent profile analysis revealed three distinct patterns: para-human perception, para-machine perception, and asymmetric perception. Finite mixture modeling demonstrated that the benefit of humanizing AI's voice for competence-related trust can evaporate once AI's language understanding is perceived as poor. Interestingly, the asymmetry between humanness perceptions in speaking and listening can impede morality-related trust. By adopting a person-centered approach to address the relationship between dual humanness and user trust, this study contributes to the literature on trust in conversational AI and the practice of trust-inducing AI design.
    Keywords: Artificial intelligence,Humanness perception,Trust,Person-centered approach,Finite mixture modeling
    Date: 2021–06–01
  6. By: Silvia Angerer; Daniela Glätzle-Rützler; Philipp Lergetporer; Thomas Rittmannsberger
    Abstract: Peoples’ willingness to vaccinate is critical to combating the COVID-19 pandemic. We devise a representative experiment to study how the design of the vaccine approval procedure affects public attitudes towards vaccination. Compared to an Emergency Use Authorization, choosing the more thorough Accelerated Authorization approval procedure increases vaccination intentions by 13 percentage points. Effects of increased duration of the approval procedure are positive and significant only for Emergency Use Authorization. Treatment effects are homogenous across population subgroups. Increased trust in the vaccine is the key mediator of treatment effects on vaccination intentions.
    Keywords: vaccination, Covid-19, approval procedure, experiment
    JEL: I12 I18 C93 D83
    Date: 2022

This nep-cbe issue is ©2022 by Marco Novarese. It is provided as is without any express or implied warranty. It may be freely redistributed in whole or in part for any purpose. If distributed in part, please include this notice.
General information on the NEP project can be found at For comments please write to the director of NEP, Marco Novarese at <>. Put “NEP” in the subject, otherwise your mail may be rejected.
NEP’s infrastructure is sponsored by the School of Economics and Finance of Massey University in New Zealand.