IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/iza/izadps/dp17608.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Measuring Economic Preferences with Surveys and Behavioral Experiments

Author

Listed:
  • Kosfeld, Michael

    (Goethe University Frankfurt)

  • Sharafi, Zahra

    (Frankfurt School of Finance and Management)

  • Sontag González, Maíra

    (Goethe University Frankfurt)

  • Zou, Na

    (University of Bath)

Abstract

Developing reliable and practicable measures of economic preferences is a crucial task for empirical economic research with high value for both theory and applications. Here, we present results from a first comprehensive "behavioral validation analysis" of the Global Preference Survey Module (GPS) and the corresponding Preference Survey Module (PSM) developed by Falk et al. (2018, 2023) that have been widely used for the measurement and analysis of economic preferences on a global scale. Our key questions are how well GPS and PSM modules explain behavior in incentivized choice experiments in other countries than in the original validation in Germany, and to what extent survey items and modules developed from behavioral experiments in different countries and cultures resemble one another. Our current results, which are based on experiments in three very diverse countries—China, Iran, and Kenya—show that many GPS and PSM survey items predict behavior in incentivized choice experiments, but coefficients vary and are not always sizable. Quantitative items, which are based on hypothetical choice experiments, are consistently selected into survey modules, whereas the best qualitative items differ between countries. At the same time, the contribution in terms of explanatory power of these latter items is comparably lower. Our analysis provides a first empirical basis for the development of survey modules that reliably predict behavior in incentivized choice experiments and real-life situations across diverse countries and contexts. Additional results, including principal component analysis and prediction of real-life behavior, highlight important gaps that warrant further investigation in future research.

Suggested Citation

  • Kosfeld, Michael & Sharafi, Zahra & Sontag González, Maíra & Zou, Na, 2025. "Measuring Economic Preferences with Surveys and Behavioral Experiments," IZA Discussion Papers 17608, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
  • Handle: RePEc:iza:izadps:dp17608
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://docs.iza.org/dp17608.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Bart H.H. Golsteyn & Hans Grönqvist & Lena Lindahl, 2014. "Adolescent Time Preferences Predict Lifetime Outcomes," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 124(580), pages 739-761, November.
    2. Backes-Gellner, Uschi & Herz, Holger & Kosfeld, Michael & Oswald, Yvonne, 2021. "Do preferences and biases predict life outcomes? Evidence from education and labor market entry decisions," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 134(C).
    3. Armin Falk & Ernst Fehr & Urs Fischbacher, 2005. "Driving Forces Behind Informal Sanctions," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 73(6), pages 2017-2030, November.
    4. Grund, Christian & Sliwka, Dirk, 2010. "Evidence on performance pay and risk aversion," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 106(1), pages 8-11, January.
    5. Menkhoff, Lukas & Sakha, Sahra, 2017. "Estimating risky behavior with multiple-item risk measures," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 59(C), pages 59-86.
    6. Matthias Sutter & Martin G. Kocher & Daniela Glätzle-Rützler & Stefan T. Trautmann, 2013. "Impatience and Uncertainty: Experimental Decisions Predict Adolescents' Field Behavior," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 103(1), pages 510-531, February.
    7. Thomas Dohmen & Armin Falk & David Huffman & Uwe Sunde & Jürgen Schupp & Gert G. Wagner, 2011. "Individual Risk Attitudes: Measurement, Determinants, And Behavioral Consequences," Journal of the European Economic Association, European Economic Association, vol. 9(3), pages 522-550, June.
    8. Guido Friebel & Michael Kosfeld & Gerd Thielmann, 2019. "Trust the Police? Self-Selection of Motivated Agents into the German Police Force," American Economic Journal: Microeconomics, American Economic Association, vol. 11(4), pages 59-78, November.
    9. Tim Kautz & James J. Heckman & Ron Diris & Bas ter Weel & Lex Borghans, 2014. "Fostering and Measuring Skills: Improving Cognitive and Non-cognitive Skills to Promote Lifetime Success," OECD Education Working Papers 110, OECD Publishing.
    10. Bauer, Michal & Chytilová, Julie & Miguel, Edward, 2020. "Using survey questions to measure preferences: Lessons from an experimental validation in Kenya," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 127(C).
    11. Thomas Dohmen & Armin Falk & David Huffman & Uwe Sunde, 2009. "Homo Reciprocans: Survey Evidence on Behavioural Outcomes," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 119(536), pages 592-612, March.
    12. Stephan Meier & Charles Sprenger, 2010. "Present-Biased Preferences and Credit Card Borrowing," American Economic Journal: Applied Economics, American Economic Association, vol. 2(1), pages 193-210, January.
    13. DavidC. Parsley & Shang-Jin Wei, 2007. "A Prism into the PPP Puzzles: The Micro-Foundations of Big Mac Real Exchange Rates," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 117(523), pages 1336-1356, October.
    14. Bonin, Holger & Dohmen, Thomas & Falk, Armin & Huffman, David & Sunde, Uwe, 2007. "Cross-sectional earnings risk and occupational sorting: The role of risk attitudes," Labour Economics, Elsevier, vol. 14(6), pages 926-937, December.
    15. Armin Falk & Anke Becker & Thomas Dohmen & David Huffman & Uwe Sunde, 2023. "The Preference Survey Module: A Validated Instrument for Measuring Risk, Time, and Social Preferences," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 69(4), pages 1935-1950, April.
    16. Jeffrey Carpenter & Erika Seki, 2011. "Do Social Preferences Increase Productivity? Field Experimental Evidence From Fishermen In Toyama Bay," Economic Inquiry, Western Economic Association International, vol. 49(2), pages 612-630, April.
    17. Cárdenas, Juan Camilo & Chong, Alberto & Ñopo, Hugo, 2013. "Stated social behavior and revealed actions: Evidence from six Latin American countries," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 104(C), pages 16-33.
    18. David A. Jaeger & Thomas Dohmen & Armin Falk & David Huffman & Uwe Sunde & Holger Bonin, 2010. "Direct Evidence on Risk Attitudes and Migration," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 92(3), pages 684-689, August.
    19. Marco Caliendo & Frank Fossen & Alexander Kritikos, 2009. "Risk attitudes of nascent entrepreneurs–new evidence from an experimentally validated survey," Small Business Economics, Springer, vol. 32(2), pages 153-167, February.
    20. Uwe Sunde & Thomas Dohmen & Benjamin Enke & Armin Falkbriq & David Huffman & Gerrit Meyerheim, 2022. "Patience and Comparative Development," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 89(5), pages 2806-2840.
    21. Armin Falk & Anke Becker & Thomas Dohmen & Benjamin Enke & David B. Huffman & Uwe Sunde, 2017. "Global Evidence on Economic Preferences," NBER Working Papers 23943, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    22. Eric A Hanushek & Lavinia Kinneifo & Philipp Lergetporer & Ludger Woessmann, 2022. "Patience, Risk-Taking, and Human Capital Investment Across Countries," The Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 132(646), pages 2290-2307.
    23. Verschoor, Arjan & D’Exelle, Ben & Perez-Viana, Borja, 2016. "Lab and life: Does risky choice behaviour observed in experiments reflect that in the real world?," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 128(C), pages 134-148.
    24. Armin Falk & Anke Becker & Thomas Dohmen & Benjamin Enke & David Huffman & Uwe Sunde, 2018. "Global Evidence on Economic Preferences," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 133(4), pages 1645-1692.
    25. Pia R. Pinger, 2017. "Thinking about Tomorrow? Predicting Experimental Choice Behavior and Life Outcomes from a Survey Measure of Present Bias," SOEPpapers on Multidisciplinary Panel Data Research 935, DIW Berlin, The German Socio-Economic Panel (SOEP).
    26. Guth, Werner & Schmittberger, Rolf & Schwarze, Bernd, 1982. "An experimental analysis of ultimatum bargaining," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 3(4), pages 367-388, December.
    27. Rachel Croson & Uri Gneezy, 2009. "Gender Differences in Preferences," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 47(2), pages 448-474, June.
    28. Michael Kosfeld & Devesh Rustagi, 2015. "Leader Punishment and Cooperation in Groups: Experimental Field Evidence from Commons Management in Ethiopia," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 105(2), pages 747-783, February.
    29. Lades, Leonhard K. & Laffan, Kate & Weber, Till O., 2021. "Do economic preferences predict pro-environmental behaviour?," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 183(C).
    30. Christopher Chabris & David Laibson & Carrie Morris & Jonathon Schuldt & Dmitry Taubinsky, 2008. "Individual laboratory-measured discount rates predict field behavior," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 37(2), pages 237-269, December.
    31. Coppola, Michela, 2014. "Eliciting risk-preferences in socio-economic surveys: How do different measures perform?," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 48(C), pages 1-10.
    32. Francesca Gino & Michael I. Norton & Roberto A. Weber, 2016. "Motivated Bayesians: Feeling Moral While Acting Egoistically," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 30(3), pages 189-212, Summer.
    33. Anderson, Lisa R. & Mellor, Jennifer M., 2008. "Predicting health behaviors with an experimental measure of risk preference," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 27(5), pages 1260-1274, September.
    34. Pia Rosina Pinger, 2017. "Predicting Experimental Choice Behavior and Life Outcomes from a Survey Measure of Present Bias," Economics Bulletin, AccessEcon, vol. 37(3), pages 2162-2172.
    35. Camerer, Colin & Dreber, Anna & Forsell, Eskil & Ho, Teck-Hua & Huber, Jurgen & Johannesson, Magnus & Kirchler, Michael & Almenberg, Johan & Altmejd, Adam & Chan, Taizan & Heikensten, Emma & Holzmeist, 2016. "Evaluating replicability of laboratory experiments in Economics," MPRA Paper 75461, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    36. Detemple, Julian, 2024. "Thoughts about the dictator and trust game," SAFE Working Paper Series 422, Leibniz Institute for Financial Research SAFE.
    37. Kosfeld, Michael & Sharafi, Zahra, 2023. "The Preference Survey Module: Evidence on social preferences from Tehran," SAFE Working Paper Series 393, Leibniz Institute for Financial Research SAFE.
    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. Breitkopf, Laura & Chowdhury, Shyamal K. & Priyam, Shambhavi & Schildberg-Hörisch, Hannah & Sutter, Matthias, 2020. "Do economic preferences of children predict behavior?," DICE Discussion Papers 342, Heinrich Heine University Düsseldorf, Düsseldorf Institute for Competition Economics (DICE).
    2. Armin Falk & Anke Becker & Thomas Dohmen & Benjamin Enke & David Huffman & Uwe Sunde, 2018. "Global Evidence on Economic Preferences," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 133(4), pages 1645-1692.
    3. Armin Falk & Fabian Kosse & Pia Pinger & Hannah Schildberg-Hörisch & Thomas Deckers, 2021. "Socioeconomic Status and Inequalities in Children’s IQ and Economic Preferences," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 129(9), pages 2504-2545.
    4. Bauer, Michal & Chytilová, Julie & Miguel, Edward, 2020. "Using survey questions to measure preferences: Lessons from an experimental validation in Kenya," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 127(C).
    5. Armin Falk & Anke Becker & Thomas Dohmen & David Huffman & Uwe Sunde, 2023. "The Preference Survey Module: A Validated Instrument for Measuring Risk, Time, and Social Preferences," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 69(4), pages 1935-1950, April.
    6. Pablo Brañas-Garza & Diego Jorrat & Antonio M. Espín & Angel Sánchez, 2023. "Paid and hypothetical time preferences are the same: lab, field and online evidence," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 26(2), pages 412-434, April.
    7. Joshua Tasoff & Wenjie Zhang, 2022. "The Performance of Time-Preference and Risk-Preference Measures in Surveys," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 68(2), pages 1149-1173, February.
    8. Dohmen, Thomas & Quercia, Simone & Willrodt, Jana, 2018. "Willingness to Take Risk: The Role of Risk Conception and Optimism," IZA Discussion Papers 11642, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    9. Tim Friehe & Markus Pannenberg, 2020. "Time preferences and political regimes: evidence from reunified Germany," Journal of Population Economics, Springer;European Society for Population Economics, vol. 33(1), pages 349-387, January.
    10. Thomas Dohmen & Simone Quercia & Jana Willrodt, 2023. "On the psychology of the relation between optimism and risk taking," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 67(2), pages 193-214, October.
    11. Angerer, Silvia & Bolvashenkova, Jana & Glätzle-Rützler, Daniela & Lergetporer, Philipp & Sutter, Matthias, 2023. "Children’s patience and school-track choices several years later: Linking experimental and field data," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 220(C).
    12. Andreas Ziegler, 2020. "New Ecological Paradigm meets behavioral economics: On the relationship between environmental values and economic preferences," MAGKS Papers on Economics 202020, Philipps-Universität Marburg, Faculty of Business Administration and Economics, Department of Economics (Volkswirtschaftliche Abteilung).
    13. Lena Detlefsen & Andreas Friedl & Katharina Lima Miranda & Ulrich Schmidt & Matthias Sutter, 2024. "Are economic preferences shaped by the family context? The relation of birth order and siblings’ gender composition to economic preferences," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 69(1), pages 1-31, August.
    14. Dániel Horn & Hubert János Kiss, 2020. "Time preferences and their life outcome correlates: Evidence from a representative survey," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 15(7), pages 1-26, July.
    15. Ziegler, Andreas, 2021. "New Ecological Paradigm meets behavioral economics: On the relationship between environmental values and economic preferences," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 109(C).
    16. Ziegler, Andreas, 2019. "New Ecological Paradigm meets behavioral economics: On the relationship between environmental values and economic preferences," VfS Annual Conference 2019 (Leipzig): 30 Years after the Fall of the Berlin Wall - Democracy and Market Economy 203562, Verein für Socialpolitik / German Economic Association.
    17. Silvia Angerer & Helena Antonie Baier & Daniela Glätzle-Rützler & Philipp Lergetporer & Thomas Rittmannsberger, 2024. "Economic Preferences Predict Covid-19 Vaccination Intentions and Behavior," CESifo Working Paper Series 11566, CESifo.
    18. Silvia Angerer & Helena Antonie Baier & Daniela Glätzle-Rützler & Philipp Lergetporer & Thomas Rittmansberger, 2025. "Economic Preferences Predict COVID-19 Vaccination Intentions and Behavior," Munich Papers in Political Economy 37, Munich School of Politics and Public Policy and the School of Management at the Technical University of Munich.
    19. Antonio Alfonso & Pablo Brañas-Garza & Diego Jorrat & Benjamín Prissé & María José Vázquez-De Francisco, 2024. "The Baking of Preferences throughout the High School," Working Papers 316, Red Nacional de Investigadores en Economía (RedNIE).
    20. Daniel Horn & Hubert Janos Kiss, 2018. "Which preferences associate with school performance?—Lessons from an exploratory study with university students," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 13(2), pages 1-32, February.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    economic preference; measurement; experiment; survey;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • C83 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Data Collection and Data Estimation Methodology; Computer Programs - - - Survey Methods; Sampling Methods
    • C91 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Design of Experiments - - - Laboratory, Individual Behavior
    • D01 - Microeconomics - - General - - - Microeconomic Behavior: Underlying Principles

    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:iza:izadps:dp17608. 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: Holger Hinte (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/izaaade.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.