|
on Cognitive and Behavioural Economics |
|
Issue of 2025–03–17
three papers chosen by Marco Novarese, Università degli Studi del Piemonte Orientale |
| By: | Butler, David (University College Cork); Butler, Robert (University College Cork); Singleton, Carl (University of Stirling) |
| Abstract: | We study the objectivity of officiating under extreme pressure by analysing additional time played at the 2022 FIFA World Cup and 2024 UEFA European Championship. Controlling for within-match events, rules should be applied consistently across both halves of a football match. However, we argue that second-half time allocations could be increased by greater social pressure, intensity, and stakes, as final payoffs become imminent. Our analysis shows that, even after accounting for major stoppages and events – and despite identical rules – referees add substantially more time in the second half than the first. Moreover, referees allow more stoppage time when the scoreline is close in the second half, but only at the World Cup because tight contests were cut short there in the first halves. These discrepancies raise concerns about the effectiveness of time-wasting strategies in the sport. More broadly, our results contribute to the discussion of decision-making under pressure and implicit biases in high-stakes environments. |
| Keywords: | decision making, judgement, bias, pressure, additional time |
| JEL: | D01 D91 L83 Z20 |
| Date: | 2025–02 |
| URL: | https://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:iza:izadps:dp17718 |
| By: | Robin Bodenberger; Kirsten Thommes |
| Abstract: | The communication of uncertainties needs to be as precise as possible to enable the receiver of risk-messages to adapt their behavior appropriately. However, the communication of uncertainties comes with its own set of challenges as most senders prefer to communicate uncertainty through verbal probability phrases (e.g., likely) - a communication form characterized by its ambiguity and (framed) directionality. While it is well known that receivers often do not translate such phrases into the numerical probability intended by the sender, it is less clear how this discrepancy influences subsequent behavioral actions. By implementing a laboratory experiment, we show that individuals value uncertain options with medium to high likelihoods significantly lower when uncertainty is communicated verbally rather than numerically. This effect may lead to less rational decisions under verbal communication, particularly at high likelihoods. Those results remain consistent even if individuals translate verbal uncertainty correctly into the associate numerical uncertainty, implying that a biased behavioral response is not only induced by mistranslations. Instead, ambiguity about the exact meaning of a verbal phrase interferes with decision-making even beyond mere mistranslations. These findings tie in with previous research on ambiguity aversion, which has predominantly operationalized ambiguity through numerical ranges rather than verbal phrases. We conclude that managers and firms should carefully consider the impact of uncertainty framing on employees' decision-making and customer purchasing behavior, opting for numerical probabilities when possible. |
| Date: | 2025–02 |
| URL: | https://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:arx:papers:2502.06241 |
| By: | Eßer, Jana; Flörchinger, Daniela; Frondel, Manuel; Sommer, Stephan |
| Abstract: | Cognitive inconsistency, the discrepancy between individuals' behavior and their self-image, can cause the psychological discomfort called cognitive dissonance. In this paper, we investigate whether providing information that enhances the salience of cognitive inconsistency can increase sustainable consumption. Specifically, we analyze whether individuals avoid cognitive inconsistency by (a) a change in behavior to comply with own attitudes and by (b) the denial of attitudes and of knowledge about the criticism of conventional online shopping. To this end, we embed an incentivized discrete-choice task in a large-scale survey conducted in Germany in 2021, with the choice being between a voucher for either a conventional or a sustainable online market place. With our experimental setting, we aim to increase the salience of cognitive inconsistency by either randomly reminding participants of their previously stated attitudes towards sustainable production or by informing them about the typical criticism of conventional online shopping. Our empirical results indicate that individuals adapt their behavior after having received the reminder of their stated attitudes and the criticism about conventional online shopping. Yet, participants do not deceive themselves by aligning their attitudes with their behavior or by denying to have been aware of the criticism. |
| Abstract: | Kognitive Inkonsistenz, d. h. die Diskrepanz zwischen dem Verhalten einer Person und ihrem Selbstbild, kann ein psychologisches Unbehagen hervorrufen, das als kognitive Dissonanz bezeichnet wird. In diesem Beitrag untersuchen wir, ob die Bereitstellung von Informationen, die die Bedeutung kognitiver Inkonsistenz erhöhen, den nachhaltigen Konsum steigern kann. Konkret analysieren wir, ob Individuen kognitive Inkonsistenz vermeiden, indem sie (a) ihr Verhalten ändern, um mit ihren eigenen Einstellungen übereinzustimmen, und (b) indem sie ihre Einstellungen und ihr Wissen über die Kritik am konventionellen Online-Shopping verleugnen. Zu diesem Zweck betten wir eine Discrete-Choice-Aufgabe in eine groß angelegte Befragung in Deutschland aus dem Jahr 2021 ein, bei der die Wahl zwischen einem Gutschein für einen konventionellen oder einen nachhaltigen Online-Marktplatz besteht. Mit unserem experimentellen Setting zielen wir darauf ab, die Salienz der kognitiven Inkonsistenz zu erhöhen, indem wir die Teilnehmenden entweder zufällig an ihre zuvor geäußerten Einstellungen zu nachhaltiger Produktion erinnern oder sie über die typische Kritik am konventionellen Online-Einkauf informieren. Unsere empirischen Ergebnisse deuten darauf hin, dass Personen ihr Verhalten anpassen, nachdem sie an ihre Einstellungen erinnert und über die Kritik am konventionellen Online-Shopping informiert wurden. Die Teilnehmenden täuschen sich jedoch nicht selbst, indem sie ihre Einstellungen mit ihrem Verhalten in Einklang bringen oder leugnen, von der Kritik gewusst zu haben. |
| Keywords: | Behavioral economics, cognitive dissonance, sustainable behavior |
| JEL: | A13 H23 D91 |
| Date: | 2024 |
| URL: | https://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:zbw:rwirep:311295 |