IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/awi/wpaper/0730.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Strategic Ignorance and Perceived Control

Author

Listed:
  • Balietti, Anca
  • Budjan, Angelika
  • Eymess, Tillmann
  • Soldà, Alice

Abstract

Information can trigger unpleasant emotions. As a result, individuals might be tempted to willfully ignore it. We experimentally investigate whether increasing perceived control can mitigate strategic ignorance. Participants from India were presented with a choice to receive information about the health risk associated with air pollution and later asked to recall it. We find that perceived control leads to a substantial improvement in information retention. Moreover, perceived control mostly benefits optimists, who show both a reduction in information avoidance and an increase in information retention. This latter result is confirmed with a US sample. A theoretical framework rationalizes these findings.

Suggested Citation

  • Balietti, Anca & Budjan, Angelika & Eymess, Tillmann & Soldà, Alice, 2023. "Strategic Ignorance and Perceived Control," Working Papers 0730, University of Heidelberg, Department of Economics.
    • Handle: RePEc:awi:wpaper:0730
    Note: This paper is part of http://archiv.ub.uni-heidelberg.de/volltextserver/view/schriftenreihen/sr-3.html
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://nbn-resolving.de/urn/resolver.pl?urn=urn:nbn:de:bsz:16-heidok-337330
    File Function: Frontdoor page on HeiDOK
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://archiv.ub.uni-heidelberg.de/volltextserver/33733/7/Balietti_et_al._2023_dp730.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Tatyana Deryugina & Garth Heutel & Nolan H. Miller & David Molitor & Julian Reif, 2019. "The Mortality and Medical Costs of Air Pollution: Evidence from Changes in Wind Direction," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 109(12), pages 4178-4219, December.
    2. Buddelmeyer, Hielke & Powdthavee, Nattavudh, 2016. "Can having internal locus of control insure against negative shocks? Psychological evidence from panel data," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 122(C), pages 88-109.
    3. Margo Coleman & Thomas DeLeire, 2003. "An Economic Model of Locus of Control and the Human Capital Investment Decision," Journal of Human Resources, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 38(3).
    4. King Li, 2013. "Asymmetric memory recall of positive and negative events in social interactions," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 16(3), pages 248-262, September.
    5. Andrew Caplin & Mark Dean, 2015. "Revealed Preference, Rational Inattention, and Costly Information Acquisition," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 105(7), pages 2183-2203, July.
    6. Emily Oster & Ira Shoulson & E. Ray Dorsey, 2013. "Optimal Expectations and Limited Medical Testing: Evidence from Huntington Disease," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 103(2), pages 804-830, April.
    7. Alexander Peysakhovich & Uma R. Karmarkar, 2016. "Asymmetric Effects of Favorable and Unfavorable Information on Decision Making Under Ambiguity," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 62(8), pages 2163-2178, August.
    8. Edward L. Glaeser & Cass R. Sunstein, 2013. "Why Does Balanced News Produce Unbalanced Views?," NBER Working Papers 18975, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    9. Christopher Hoy & Franziska Mager, 2021. "Why Are Relatively Poor People Not More Supportive of Redistribution? Evidence from a Randomized Survey Experiment across Ten Countries," American Economic Journal: Economic Policy, American Economic Association, vol. 13(4), pages 299-328, November.
    10. Jason Dana & Roberto Weber & Jason Kuang, 2007. "Exploiting moral wiggle room: experiments demonstrating an illusory preference for fairness," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 33(1), pages 67-80, October.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Katharina Momsen & Sebastian O. Schneider, 2022. "Motivated Reasoning, Information Avoidance, and Default Bias," Discussion Paper Series of the Max Planck Institute for Research on Collective Goods 2022_03, Max Planck Institute for Research on Collective Goods.
    2. Daniele Pennesi, 2020. "Identity and information acquisition," Carlo Alberto Notebooks 610, Collegio Carlo Alberto, revised 2021.
    3. Momsen, Katharina & Ohndorf, Markus, 2023. "Information avoidance: Self-image concerns, inattention, and ideology," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 211(C), pages 386-400.
    4. Kops, Christopher & Pasichnichenko, Illia, 2023. "Testing negative value of information and ambiguity aversion," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 213(C).
    5. Pons Rotger, Gabriel & Rosholm, Michael, 2020. "The Role of Beliefs in Long Sickness Absence: Experimental Evidence from a Psychological Intervention," IZA Discussion Papers 13582, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    6. Michael Thaler, 2024. "The Fake News Effect: Experimentally Identifying Motivated Reasoning Using Trust in News," American Economic Journal: Microeconomics, American Economic Association, vol. 16(2), pages 1-38, May.
    7. Liu, Jia & Sonntag, Axel & Zizzo, Daniel John, 2022. "Information defaults in repeated public good provision," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 197(C), pages 356-369.
    8. Bai, Yu & Emmers, Dorien & Li, Ying & Tang, Lei, 2022. "Parental locus of control and early childhood development: Evidence on parent and grandparent caregivers in rural China," China Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 74(C).
    9. Recalde, María P. & Riedl, Arno & Vesterlund, Lise, 2018. "Error-prone inference from response time: The case of intuitive generosity in public-good games," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 160(C), pages 132-147.
    10. Marta Serra-Garcia & Nora Szech, 2022. "The (In)Elasticity of Moral Ignorance," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 68(7), pages 4815-4834, July.
    11. Warn N. Lekfuangfu & Nattavudh Powdthavee & Nele Warrinnier & Francesca Cornaglia, 2018. "Locus of Control and its Intergenerational Implications for Early Childhood Skill Formation," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 128(608), pages 298-329, February.
    12. Kesavayuth, Dusanee & Ko, Kaung Myat & Zikos, Vasileios, 2018. "Locus of control and financial risk attitudes," Economic Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 72(C), pages 122-131.
    13. Andrew E Clark & Rong Zhu, 2024. "Taking Back Control? Quasi-Experimental Evidence on the Impact of Retirement on Locus of Control," The Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 134(660), pages 1465-1493.
    14. Thomas Neuber, 2021. "Egocentric Norm Adoption," ECONtribute Discussion Papers Series 116, University of Bonn and University of Cologne, Germany.
    15. Bonsang, Eric & Costa-Font, Joan, 2022. "Buying control? ‘Locus of control’ and the uptake of supplementary health insurance," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 204(C), pages 476-489.
    16. Marco Caliendo & Juliane Hennecke, 2022. "Drinking is different! Examining the role of locus of control for alcohol consumption," Empirical Economics, Springer, vol. 63(5), pages 2785-2815, November.
    17. Linda Thunström & Jonas Nordström & Jason F. Shogren & Mariah Ehmke & Klaas Veld, 2016. "Strategic self-ignorance," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 52(2), pages 117-136, April.
    18. Caliendo, Marco & Cobb-Clark, Deborah A. & Silva-Goncalves, Juliana & Uhlendorff, Arne, 2024. "Locus of control and the preference for agency," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 165(C).
    19. Michael Thaler, 2020. "Good News Is Not a Sufficient Condition for Motivated Reasoning," Papers 2012.01548, arXiv.org, revised Jan 2024.
    20. Edika Quispe-Torreblanca & John Gathergood & George Loewenstein & Neil Stewart, 2020. "Attention Utility: Evidence from Individual Investors," CESifo Working Paper Series 8091, CESifo.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    air pollution; information avoidance; information retention; perceived control; motivated cognition; Luftverschmutzung;
    All these keywords.

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:awi:wpaper:0730. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Gabi Rauscher (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/awheide.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.