|
on Neuroeconomics |
|
Issue of 2016‒10‒09
four papers chosen by |
| By: | Cédric Chaffois (MTS - Management Technologique et Strategique - Grenoble École de Management (GEM)); Thomas Gillier (MTS - Management Technologique et Strategique - Grenoble École de Management (GEM)); Mustapha Belkhouja (MTS - Management Technologique et Strategique - Grenoble École de Management (GEM)); Yannig Roth (Université Paris 1 Panthéon-Sorbonne) |
| Abstract: | Online idea generation platforms are increasingly used to generate ideas of innovative products. Crafting the problem statement carefully is a key factor of success, however, the current literature remains limited concerning what kind of task instructions should be used to increase the quality of ideas in online idea generation. This research examines three different types of task instructions. The unbounded task instructions allowed participants generating the ideas they wish without any restriction. The suggestive task instructions indicate domains of ideas that are innovative. The prohibitive task instructions indicate domains of ideas that are not innovative. The impact of these three types of task instructions on creative outcomes is compared through an empirical study on eYeka, a global online idea generation platform. Based on logit models, we found that the task instructions have a significant impact on the creativity of participants. Our result shows that prohibitive task instructions enable the production of the most original ideas whereas suggestive task instructions favor the production of the most feasible and valuable ideas. Unbounded task instructions are mostly found to be inefficient. The implications for the management of online idea generation communities are discussed. 2 " The formulation of a problem is often more essential than its solution, which may be merely a matter of mathematical or experimental. " A. Einstein, L. Infeld in The Evolution of Physics (p.92). |
| Keywords: | fixation effect,task instructions,problem formulation,idea generation,crowdsourcing,creativity |
| Date: | 2015–06–14 |
| URL: | http://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:hal:journl:halshs-01273087&r=neu |
| By: | Christopher Blattman; Julian Jamison; Margaret Sheridan |
| Abstract: | We show that a number of "non cognitive" skills and preferences, including patience and identity, are malleable in adults, and that investments in them reduce crime and violence. We recruited criminally-engaged men and randomized half to eight weeks of cognitive behavioral therapy designed to foster self-regulation, patience, and a noncriminal identity and lifestyle. We also randomized $200 grants. Cash alone and therapy alone initially reduced crime and violence, but effects dissipated over time. When cash followed therapy, crime and violence decreased dramatically for at least a year. We hypothesize that cash reinforced therapy's impacts by prolonging learning-by-doing, lifestyle changes, and self-investment. |
| Date: | 2016 |
| URL: | http://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:feb:artefa:00544&r=neu |
| By: | Christopher Blattman; Julian Jamison; Margaret Sheridan |
| Abstract: | We show that a number of "non cognitive" skills and preferences, including patience and identity, are malleable in adults, and that investments in them reduce crime and violence. We recruited criminally-engaged men and randomized half to eight weeks of cognitive behavioral therapy designed to foster self-regulation, patience, and a noncriminal identity and lifestyle. We also randomized $200 grants. Cash alone and therapy alone initially reduced crime and violence, but effects dissipated over time. When cash followed therapy, crime and violence decreased dramatically for at least a year. We hypothesize that cash reinforced therapy's impacts by prolonging learning-by-doing, lifestyle changes, and self-investment. |
| Date: | 2016 |
| URL: | http://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:feb:artefa:00545&r=neu |
| By: | Christian Basteck; Marco Mantovani; ; |
| Abstract: | We take school admission mechanisms to the lab to test whether the widely-used manipulable Boston-mechanism disadvantages students of lower cognitive ability and whether this leads to ability segregation across schools. Results show this is the case: lower ability participants receive lower payoffs and are over-represented at the worst school. Under the strategy-proof Deferred Acceptance mechanism, payoff differences are reduced, and ability distributions across schools harmonized. Hence, we find support for the argument that a strategy-proof mechanisms “levels the playing-field”. Finally, we document a trade-off between equity and efficiency in that average payoffs are larger under Boston than under Deferred Acceptance. |
| JEL: | C78 C91 D82 I24 |
| Date: | 2016–10 |
| URL: | http://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:hum:wpaper:sfb649dp2016-037&r=neu |