IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ifs/ifsewp/18-14.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Subjective expectations of survival and economic behaviour

Author

Listed:
  • Cormac O'Dea

    (Institute for Fiscal Studies and Yale University)

  • David Sturrock

    (Institute for Fiscal Studies and Institute for Fiscal Studies)

Abstract

This paper investigates individuals’ expectations about their own survival to older ages and compares these to projected and actual survival rates. The extent to which individuals have, on average, reasonable expectations about survival to older ages is important in a context of increasing personal responsibility for, and control over, the accumulation and use of retirement savings. We use data from the English Longitudinal Study of Ageing, which surveyed a representative sample of the English household population aged 50 and over between 2002­–03 and 2014–15, and the ONS 2014-based life tables for England and Wales. Subjective expectations of survival Modern surveys ask individuals about their probability of survival to specific older ages. In only a small proportion of cases is there clear evidence that these questions are not understood. 98% of individuals gave an answer to a question asking their chances of surviving to older ages and of these just 14% – i.e. fewer than one-in-six – showed clear evidence of misunderstanding (e.g. by reporting no chance of death in the coming 10-year period). Individuals’ stated beliefs about their probability of survival are correlated with known risk factors such as smoking and the age that their parents died. Those who currently smoke report on average 6–8 percentage points lower chance of surviving to an age 11–15 years ahead than do people who have never smoked. Those whose mother died at age 85 or older report on average 5-7 percentage points higher chance of surviving to an age 11–15 years ahead than do those whose mother died aged 60-64. Beliefs about probability of survival are also correlated with the individual’s actual age of death and respond to new diagnoses of health conditions. Those reporting a 10% or less chance of survival to an age 11–15 years ahead were more than twice as likely to die in the following 10 years than those who reported a 50% or greater chance of survival. A new cancer diagnosis was associated with a 5 percentage point reduction in the stated probability of surviving to an age 11–15 years ahead. Comparing subjective expectations with life table estimates and mortality data Relative to life tables, individuals from a range of ages and birth cohorts underestimate their chances of survival to ages 75, 80 and 85, on average. Those in their 50s and 60s underestimate their chances of survival to age 75 by around 20 percentage points and to 85 by around 5 to 10 percentage For example, men born in the 1940s who were interviewed at age 65 reported a 65% chance of making it to age 75, whereas the official estimate was 83%. For women, the equivalent figures were 65% and 89%. Individuals in their late 70s and 80s are, on average, optimistic about surviving to ages 90, 95 and above. This optimism becomes larger at older ages (10–15 percentage points when looking at age 95) and is larger for men than for women, amongst those born in the 1920s and 1930 For example, men born in the 1930s who were interviewed at age 80 reported a 32% chance of making it to age 95, whereas the official estimate was 17%. For women, the equivalent figures were 37% and 24%. Figure 1.1. Comparing subjective reports and “objective” life table estimates of survival probabilities (for men born 1930-39)

Suggested Citation

  • Cormac O'Dea & David Sturrock, 2018. "Subjective expectations of survival and economic behaviour," IFS Working Papers W18/14, Institute for Fiscal Studies.
  • Handle: RePEc:ifs:ifsewp:18/14
    Note: Different coloured series correspond to different ages about which respondents are asked questions. Source: ELSA waves 1–7 and ONS 2014-based cohort life tables for England and Wales. Subjective survival curves, estimated using individuals’ stated survival expectations, capture the general patterns in expectations. These show growing pessimism relative to official life tables for ages up to the mid 70s before turning to optimism from the late 90s onwards. Actual survival probabilities differ significantly according to individuals’ education, wealth and marital status. Women aged 60 in the bottom household wealth quintile had a 65% chance of surviving to age 80, compared with 87% for those in the top quintile, based on actual mortality data. Subjective survival curves reflect differences in actual mortality rates between groups to varying degrees. Widows and widowers aged 60 show the greatest survival pessimism. While their estimated chances of surviving to age 80 were 77% and 67%, respectively, their subjective survival curves implied a 49% and 39% chance, respectively, a gap of almost 30 percentage points in both cases. Subjective expectations and economic behaviour Survival pessimism is a potential driver of the unpopularity of annuities. An annuity priced according to average survival chances should represent a fair deal (or better) for around half of individuals. But given individuals own survival expectations, around two-thirds of individuals in their 60s would perceive an annuity priced according to average survival chances as offering a less than fair deal. Deferral of the state pension, a choice analogous to annuity purchase, is rarely taken up despite being offered at a favourable rate. While individuals are roughly twice as likely to defer the state pension if it represents a ‘fair deal’ given their survival expectations, the overall level of deferral is sufficiently low that we cannot make strong statements about this relationship. Optimism about survival at the very oldest ages may lead to reluctance to spend remaining wealth if an individual survives through their 80s and into their 90s or beyond. As individuals are given more control over saving for retirement and use of accumulated wealth, the divergence between subjective expectations and official projections of survival is a concern. Survival pessimism may mean that individuals save less during working life, and spend more in the earlier years of retirement, than they would, given their actual survival chances. The risk of this faster-than-optimal spending down of wealth, combined with optimism about survival at the very oldest ages, means that if individuals survive through their 80s and into their 90s, they may not only have relatively low levels of wealth, but may then be reluctant to spend this, with negative consequences for their living standards.
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.ifs.org.uk/uploads/WP201814.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Luc Bissonnette & Michael D. Hurd & Pierre‐Carl Michaud, 2017. "Individual survival curves comparing subjective and observed mortality risks," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 26(12), pages 285-303, December.
    2. Michael D. Hurd & Kathleen McGarry, 1995. "Evaluation of the Subjective Probabilities of Survival in the Health and Retirement Study," Journal of Human Resources, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 30, pages 268-292.
    3. Eric French, 2005. "The Effects of Health, Wealth, and Wages on Labour Supply and Retirement Behaviour," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 72(2), pages 395-427.
    4. Michael D. Hurd & James P. Smith & Julie M. Zissimopoulos, 2004. "The effects of subjective survival on retirement and Social Security claiming," Journal of Applied Econometrics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 19(6), pages 761-775.
    5. David E. Bloom & David Canning & Michael Moore & Younghwan Song, 2007. "The Effect of Subjective Survival Probabilities on Retirement and Wealth in the United States," Chapters, in: Robert L. Clark & Naohiro Ogawa & Andrew Mason (ed.), Population Aging, Intergenerational Transfers and the Macroeconomy, chapter 4, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    6. Joachim Inkmann & Paula Lopes & Alexander Michaelides, 2011. "How Deep Is the Annuity Market Participation Puzzle?," The Review of Financial Studies, Society for Financial Studies, vol. 24(1), pages 279-319.
    7. Cannon, Edmund & Tonks, Ian & Yuille, Rob, 2016. "The effect of the reforms to compulsion on annuity demand," National Institute Economic Review, National Institute of Economic and Social Research, vol. 237, pages 47-54, August.
    8. Amy Finkelstein & James Poterba, 2004. "Adverse Selection in Insurance Markets: Policyholder Evidence from the U.K. Annuity Market," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 112(1), pages 183-208, February.
    9. Jeffrey R. Brown, 2007. "Rational and Behavioral Perspectives on the Role of Annuities in Retirement Planning," NBER Working Papers 13537, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    10. Menahem E. Yaari, 1965. "Uncertain Lifetime, Life Insurance, and the Theory of the Consumer," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 32(2), pages 137-150.
    11. Wu, Shang & Stevens, Ralph & Thorp, Susan, 2015. "Cohort and target age effects on subjective survival probabilities: Implications for models of the retirement phase," Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control, Elsevier, vol. 55(C), pages 39-56.
    12. Todd Elder, 2013. "The Predictive Validity of Subjective Mortality Expectations: Evidence From the Health and Retirement Study," Demography, Springer;Population Association of America (PAA), vol. 50(2), pages 569-589, April.
    13. Hurd, Michael D, 1989. "Mortality Risk and Bequests," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 57(4), pages 779-813, July.
    14. Post, Thomas & Hanewald, Katja, 2013. "Longevity risk, subjective survival expectations, and individual saving behavior," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 86(C), pages 200-220.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Stefania Basiglio & Maria Cristina Rossi & Arthur van Soest, 2023. "Subjective Inheritance Expectations and Economic Outcomes," Review of Income and Wealth, International Association for Research in Income and Wealth, vol. 69(4), pages 1088-1113, December.
    2. repec:cup:judgdm:v:16:y:2021:i:4:p:1072-1096 is not listed on IDEAS
    3. Bell, D.N.F. & Comerford, D.A. & Douglas, E., 2020. "How do subjective life expectancies compare with mortality tables? Similarities and differences in three national samples," The Journal of the Economics of Ageing, Elsevier, vol. 16(C).
    4. David A. Comerford, 2021. "Apparent age and gender differences in survival optimism: To what extent are they a bias in the translation of beliefs onto a percentage scale?," Judgment and Decision Making, Society for Judgment and Decision Making, vol. 16(4), pages 1072-1096, July.
    5. Jenny Robinson & David A. Comerford, 2020. "The Effect on Annuities Preference of Prompts to Consider Life Expectancy: Evidence from a UK Quota Sample," Economica, London School of Economics and Political Science, vol. 87(347), pages 747-762, July.
    6. Sunde, Uwe, 2023. "Age, longevity, and preferences," The Journal of the Economics of Ageing, Elsevier, vol. 24(C).
    7. Basiglio, Stefania, 2018. "Essays on financial behaviour of households and firms," Other publications TiSEM c13423c5-8bf2-44a7-baa7-3, Tilburg University, School of Economics and Management.

    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. Cormac O'Dea & David Sturrock, 2019. "Survival pessimism and the demand for annuities," IFS Working Papers W19/02, Institute for Fiscal Studies.
    2. Joan Costa-Font & Cristina Vilaplana-Prieto, 2022. "Biased survival expectations and behaviours: Does domain specific information matter?," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 65(3), pages 285-317, December.
    3. Sanna Nivakoski, 2020. "Wealth and the effect of subjective survival probability," Journal of Population Economics, Springer;European Society for Population Economics, vol. 33(2), pages 633-670, April.
    4. Wu, Shang & Stevens, Ralph & Thorp, Susan, 2015. "Cohort and target age effects on subjective survival probabilities: Implications for models of the retirement phase," Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control, Elsevier, vol. 55(C), pages 39-56.
    5. Groneck, Max & Ludwig, Alexander & Zimper, Alexander, 2016. "A life-cycle model with ambiguous survival beliefs," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 162(C), pages 137-180.
    6. Vesile Kutlu-Koc & Adriaan Kalwij, 2017. "Individual Survival Expectations and Actual Mortality: Evidence from Dutch Survey and Administrative Data," European Journal of Population, Springer;European Association for Population Studies, vol. 33(4), pages 509-532, October.
    7. Svetlana Pashchenko & Ponpoje Porapakkarm, 2024. "Accounting For Social Security Claiming Behavior," International Economic Review, Department of Economics, University of Pennsylvania and Osaka University Institute of Social and Economic Research Association, vol. 65(1), pages 505-545, February.
    8. Spaenjers, Christophe & Spira, Sven Michael, 2015. "Subjective life horizon and portfolio choice," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 116(C), pages 94-106.
    9. Yang, Qianqian & Ye, Zihan & Chen, Rongda, 2024. "Working longer or working harder? Subjective survival expectations and labor supply in China," International Review of Economics & Finance, Elsevier, vol. 91(C), pages 827-847.
    10. Hurwitz, Abigail & Mitchell, Olivia S. & Sade, Orly, 2022. "Testing methods to enhance longevity awareness," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 204(C), pages 466-475.
    11. Jisoo Hwang & Seok Ki Kim, 2023. "Unexpected longevity, intergenerational policies, and fertility," Journal of Population Economics, Springer;European Society for Population Economics, vol. 36(3), pages 1607-1640, July.
    12. Anikó Bíró, 2013. "Subjective mortality hazard shocks and the adjustment of consumption expenditures," Journal of Population Economics, Springer;European Society for Population Economics, vol. 26(4), pages 1379-1408, October.
    13. Hippolyte d’Albis & Emmanuel Thibault, 2018. "Ambiguous life expectancy and the demand for annuities," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 85(3), pages 303-319, October.
    14. Bruno Arpino & Pierluigi Conzo & Francesco Salustri, 2022. "I am a survivor, keep on surviving: early-life exposure to conflict and subjective survival probabilities in adult life," Journal of Population Economics, Springer;European Society for Population Economics, vol. 35(2), pages 471-517, April.
    15. Johannes Hagen, 2015. "The determinants of annuitization: evidence from Sweden," International Tax and Public Finance, Springer;International Institute of Public Finance, vol. 22(4), pages 549-578, August.
    16. Francisco Gomes & Michael Haliassos & Tarun Ramadorai, 2021. "Household Finance," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 59(3), pages 919-1000, September.
    17. Julien Hugonnier & Florian Pelgrin, 2013. "Health and (Other) Asset Holdings," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 80(2), pages 663-710.
    18. Martin Salm, 2010. "Subjective mortality expectations and consumption and saving behaviours among the elderly," Canadian Journal of Economics, Canadian Economics Association, vol. 43(3), pages 1040-1057, August.
    19. de Bresser, Jochem, 2021. "Evaluating the Accuracy of Counterfactuals The Role of Heterogeneous Expectations in Life Cycle Models," Other publications TiSEM a7e2b4d8-fed0-4e86-926f-d, Tilburg University, School of Economics and Management.
    20. Huynh, Kim P. & Jung, Juergen, 2015. "Subjective health expectations," Journal of Policy Modeling, Elsevier, vol. 37(4), pages 693-711.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Survival expectations; savings; wealth accumulation; annuitisation;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • D14 - Microeconomics - - Household Behavior - - - Household Saving; Personal Finance
    • D84 - Microeconomics - - Information, Knowledge, and Uncertainty - - - Expectations; Speculations
    • D91 - Microeconomics - - Micro-Based Behavioral Economics - - - Role and Effects of Psychological, Emotional, Social, and Cognitive Factors on Decision Making
    • J14 - Labor and Demographic Economics - - Demographic Economics - - - Economics of the Elderly; Economics of the Handicapped; Non-Labor Market Discrimination

    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:ifs:ifsewp:18/14. 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: Emma Hyman (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/ifsssuk.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.