IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/nbr/nberwo/26522.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Estimating Biases in Smoking Cessation: Evidence from a Field Experiment

Author

Listed:
  • Frank J. Chaloupka IV
  • Matthew R. Levy
  • Justin S. White

Abstract

We conduct a randomized field experiment to quantify biases that affect consumers of addictive goods: present-biased preferences, naïve beliefs regarding present bias, and projection-biased beliefs over future abstinence. These biases reflect departures from the neoclassical benchmark needed to accommodate intertemporal and state-dependent prediction errors and have important theoretical and policy ramifications. Our experiment employs a new approach for remote monitoring to ensure truthful reporting of behavior and valuations, and a novel identification of subjects’ biases based on willingness to pay for future abstinence incentives that serve as partial commitment devices. We find that cigarette smokers overestimate their likelihood of future abstinence by more than 100%, consistent with partially-naïve present-biased preferences. We estimate that on average smokers are present biased and only partially aware of their present bias, with substantial heterogeneity and a positive correlation between the two at the individual level. Smokers mispredict the effects of an abstinence intervention. Ex ante smokers anticipate no effect of the intervention on their future abstinence and ex post fail to recognize the intervention’s positive effect. Our estimates highlight that smokers suffer from a constellation of biases: under their own long-run preferences, smokers’ choices lead to a private welfare loss of $400 per week.

Suggested Citation

  • Frank J. Chaloupka IV & Matthew R. Levy & Justin S. White, 2019. "Estimating Biases in Smoking Cessation: Evidence from a Field Experiment," NBER Working Papers 26522, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
  • Handle: RePEc:nbr:nberwo:26522
    Note: EH
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.nber.org/papers/w26522.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Dan Acland & Matthew R. Levy, 2015. "Naiveté, Projection Bias, and Habit Formation in Gym Attendance," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 61(1), pages 146-160, January.
    2. Acland, Dan & Levy, Matthew R., 2015. "Naiveté, projection bias, and habit formation in gym attendance," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 66147, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    3. Steffen Andersen & Glenn W. Harrison & Morten I. Lau & E. Elisabet Rutström, 2008. "Eliciting Risk and Time Preferences," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 76(3), pages 583-618, May.
    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. Piccoli, Luca & Tiezzi, Silvia, 2021. "Rational addiction and time-consistency: An empirical test," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 80(C).
    2. Sophie Massin & Maxence Miéra, 2020. "Measuring consumer surplus in the case of addiction: A re-examination of the rational benchmark algebra," Economics Bulletin, AccessEcon, vol. 40(4), pages 3171-3181.
    3. Paul Heidhues & Botond Kőszegi & Philipp Strack, 2024. "Overconfidence and Prejudice," ECONtribute Discussion Papers Series 316, University of Bonn and University of Cologne, Germany.
    4. Michael E. Darden, 2024. "Optimal e-cigarette policy when preferences and internalities are correlated," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 68(2), pages 107-131, April.
    5. Buckell, John & White, Justin S. & Shang, Ce, 2020. "Can incentive-compatibility reduce hypothetical bias in smokers’ experimental choice behavior? A randomized discrete choice experiment," Journal of choice modelling, Elsevier, vol. 37(C).
    6. Kaufmann, Marc, 2022. "Projection bias in effort choices," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 135(C), pages 368-393.
    7. Federico Perali & Luca Piccoli, 2022. "An Extended Theory of Rational Addiction," Mathematics, MDPI, vol. 10(15), pages 1-20, July.
    8. Paul Heidhues & Takeshi Murooka & Botond Kőszegi, 2024. "Procrastination Markets," ECONtribute Discussion Papers Series 318, University of Bonn and University of Cologne, Germany.
    9. Rodemeier, Matthias, 2021. "Buy baits and consumer sophistication: Theory and field evidence from large-scale rebate promotions," CAWM Discussion Papers 124, University of Münster, Münster Center for Economic Policy (MEP).
    10. Hunt Allcott & Charlie Rafkin, 2020. "Optimal Regulation of E-cigarettes: Theory and Evidence," NBER Working Papers 27000, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.

    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. Uttara Balakrishnan & Johannes Haushofer & Pamela Jakiela, 2020. "How soon is now? Evidence of present bias from convex time budget experiments," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 23(2), pages 294-321, June.
    2. Nan Yang & Yong Long Lim, 2018. "Temporary Incentives Change Daily Routines: Evidence from a Field Experiment on Singapore’s Subways," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 64(7), pages 3365-3379, July.
    3. Seth Garz & Xavier Gine & Dean Karlan & Rafe Mazer & Caitlin Sanford & Jonathan Zinman, 2021. "Consumer Protection for Financial Inclusion in Low- and Middle-Income Countries: Bridging Regulator and Academic Perspectives," Annual Review of Financial Economics, Annual Reviews, vol. 13(1), pages 219-246, November.
    4. Stefan Lamp, 2023. "Sunspots That Matter: The Effect of Weather on Solar Technology Adoption," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 84(4), pages 1179-1219, April.
    5. Homonoff, Tatiana & Willage, Barton & Willén, Alexander, 2020. "Rebates as incentives: The effects of a gym membership reimbursement program," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 70(C).
    6. Zachary Breig & Matthew Gibson & Jeffrey Shrader, 2019. "Why Do We Procrastinate? Present Bias and Optimism," Department of Economics Working Papers 2019-15, Department of Economics, Williams College.
    7. Belot, Michèle & James, Jonathan & Nolen, Patrick, 2016. "Incentives and children's dietary choices: A field experiment in primary schools," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 50(C), pages 213-229.
    8. Biroli, Pietro & Boneva, Teodora & Raja, Akash & Rauh, Christopher, 2022. "Parental beliefs about returns to child health investments," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 231(1), pages 33-57.
    9. Nafziger, Julia & Kaiser, Jonas P. & Koch, Alexander K, 2021. "Self-Set Goals Are Effective Self-Regulation Tools -- Despite Goal Revision," CEPR Discussion Papers 15716, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    10. Haggag, Kareem & Patterson, Richard W. & Pope, Nolan G. & Feudo, Aaron, 2021. "Attribution bias in major decisions: Evidence from the United States Military Academy," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 200(C).
    11. Timothy Gubler & Ian Larkin & Lamar Pierce, 2016. "Motivational Spillovers from Awards: Crowding Out in a Multitasking Environment," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 27(2), pages 286-303, April.
    12. Eszter Czibor & David Jimenez‐Gomez & John A. List, 2019. "The Dozen Things Experimental Economists Should Do (More of)," Southern Economic Journal, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 86(2), pages 371-432, October.
    13. Carrera, Mariana & Royer, Heather & Stehr, Mark & Sydnor, Justin, 2018. "Can financial incentives help people trying to establish new habits? Experimental evidence with new gym members," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 58(C), pages 202-214.
    14. Erin T. Bronchetti & Judd B. Kessler & Ellen B. Magenheim & Dmitry Taubinsky & Eric Zwick, 2023. "Is Attention Produced Optimally? Theory and Evidence From Experiments With Bandwidth Enhancements," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 91(2), pages 669-707, March.
    15. John Beshears & Hae Nim Lee & Katherine L. Milkman & Robert Mislavsky & Jessica Wisdom, 2021. "Creating Exercise Habits Using Incentives: The Trade-off Between Flexibility and Routinization," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 67(7), pages 4139-4171, July.
    16. Avery, Mallory & Giuntella, Osea & Jiao, Peiran, 2019. "Why Don't We Sleep Enough? A Field Experiment among College Students," IZA Discussion Papers 12772, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    17. Lechner, Michael & Fricke, Hans & Steinmayr, Andreas, 2017. "The Effect of Physical Activity on Student Performance in College: An Experimental Evaluation," CEPR Discussion Papers 12052, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    18. Fricke, Hans & Lechner, Michael & Steinmayr, Andreas, 2018. "The effects of incentives to exercise on student performance in college," Economics of Education Review, Elsevier, vol. 66(C), pages 14-39.
    19. Ozturk, Orgul D. & Frongillo, Edward A. & Blake, Christine E. & McInnes, Melayne M. & Turner-McGrievy, Gabrielle, 2020. "Before the lunch line: Effectiveness of behavioral economic interventions for pre-commitment on elementary school children's food choices," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 176(C), pages 597-618.
    20. Condliffe, Simon & Işgın, Ebru & Fitzgerald, Brynne, 2017. "Get thee to the gym! A field experiment on improving exercise habits," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 70(C), pages 23-32.

    More about this item

    JEL classification:

    • C93 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Design of Experiments - - - Field Experiments
    • D91 - Microeconomics - - Micro-Based Behavioral Economics - - - Role and Effects of Psychological, Emotional, Social, and Cognitive Factors on Decision Making
    • I12 - Health, Education, and Welfare - - Health - - - Health Behavior

    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:nbr:nberwo:26522. 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: the person in charge (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/nberrus.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.