IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/zbw/cawmdp/111.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Cost misperceptions and energy consumption: Experimental evidence for present bias and biased price beliefs

Author

Listed:
  • Werthschulte, Madeline
  • Löschel, Andreas

Abstract

The aim of this study is to link variation in energy cost misperceptions to variation in households' energy consumption. The focus is on two sorts of misperceptions: First, present biased discounting of future energy costs and second, biased energy price beliefs. By running an artefactual field experiment with a representative sample of 711 participants, we gather incentivized measures of these two misper- ceptions and observe participant's revealed electricity consumption. Our main finding is that participants with present bias are predicted to consume on average 9% more electricity than participants with time-consistent discounting. Our results further suggest that neither the true marginal electricity price nor the expected marginal electricity price can predict electricity consumption. Taken together our results raise doubt in the effectiveness of classical price based policies in reducing households' energy consumption.

Suggested Citation

  • Werthschulte, Madeline & Löschel, Andreas, 2019. "Cost misperceptions and energy consumption: Experimental evidence for present bias and biased price beliefs," CAWM Discussion Papers 111, University of Münster, Münster Center for Economic Policy (MEP).
    • Handle: RePEc:zbw:cawmdp:111
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.econstor.eu/bitstream/10419/200166/1/1668916908.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Kenneth Gillingham & Karen Palmer, 2014. "Bridging the Energy Efficiency Gap: Policy Insights from Economic Theory and Empirical Evidence," Review of Environmental Economics and Policy, Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 8(1), pages 18-38, January.
    2. Fischbacher, Urs & Schudy, Simeon & Teyssier, Sabrina, 2021. "Heterogeneous preferences and investments in energy saving measures," Resource and Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 63(C).
    3. Blasch, Julia & Boogen, Nina & Filippini, Massimo & Kumar, Nilkanth, 2017. "Explaining electricity demand and the role of energy and investment literacy on end-use efficiency of Swiss households," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 68(S1), pages 89-102.
    4. Gilbert, Ben & Graff Zivin, Joshua, 2014. "Dynamic salience with intermittent billing: Evidence from smart electricity meters," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 107(PA), pages 176-190.
    5. Heutel, Garth, 2019. "Prospect theory and energy efficiency," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 96(C), pages 236-254.
    6. Stefan T. Trautmann & Gijs Kuilen, 2015. "Belief Elicitation: A Horse Race among Truth Serums," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 125(589), pages 2116-2135, December.
    7. Qiu, Yueming & Colson, Gregory & Grebitus, Carola, 2014. "Risk preferences and purchase of energy-efficient technologies in the residential sector," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 107(C), pages 216-229.
    8. David Bradford & Charles Courtemanche & Garth Heutel & Patrick McAlvanah & Christopher Ruhm, 2017. "Time preferences and consumer behavior," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 55(2), pages 119-145, December.
    9. 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.
    10. Richard G. Newell & Juha Siikamäki, 2015. "Individual Time Preferences and Energy Efficiency," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 105(5), pages 196-200, May.
    11. 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.
    12. Glenn W. Harrison & John A. List, 2004. "Field Experiments," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 42(4), pages 1009-1055, December.
    13. Burks, Stephen & Carpenter, Jeffrey & Götte, Lorenz & Rustichini, Aldo, 2012. "Which measures of time preference best predict outcomes: Evidence from a large-scale field experiment," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 84(1), pages 308-320.
    14. Mohammed Abdellaoui & Han Bleichrodt & Olivier L’Haridon, 2008. "A tractable method to measure utility and loss aversion under prospect theory," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 36(3), pages 245-266, June.
    15. Theresa Kuchler & Michaela Pagel, 2018. "Sticking to Your Plan: The Role of Present Bias for Credit Card Paydown," NBER Working Papers 24881, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    16. Schleich, Joachim & Gassmann, Xavier & Meissner, Thomas & Faure, Corinne, 2019. "A large-scale test of the effects of time discounting, risk aversion, loss aversion, and present bias on household adoption of energy-efficient technologies," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 80(C), pages 377-393.
    17. Alexander K. Koch & Julia Nafziger, 2019. "Correlates of Narrow Bracketing," Scandinavian Journal of Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 121(4), pages 1441-1472, October.
    18. Wichman, Casey J., 2017. "Information provision and consumer behavior: A natural experiment in billing frequency," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 152(C), pages 13-33.
    19. Katrina Jessoe & David Rapson, 2014. "Knowledge Is (Less) Power: Experimental Evidence from Residential Energy Use," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 104(4), pages 1417-1438, April.
    20. Nava Ashraf & Dean Karlan & Wesley Yin, 2006. "Tying Odysseus to the Mast: Evidence From a Commitment Savings Product in the Philippines," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 121(2), pages 635-672.
    21. Koichiro Ito, 2014. "Do Consumers Respond to Marginal or Average Price? Evidence from Nonlinear Electricity Pricing," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 104(2), pages 537-563, February.
    22. Michael D. Grubb & Matthew Osborne, 2015. "Cellular Service Demand: Biased Beliefs, Learning, and Bill Shock," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 105(1), pages 234-271, January.
    23. Steven Sexton, 2015. "Automatic Bill Payment and Salience Effects: Evidence from Electricity Consumption," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 97(2), pages 229-241, May.
    24. 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.
    25. Allcott, Hunt, 2011. "Rethinking real-time electricity pricing," Resource and Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 33(4), pages 820-842.
    26. Andreoni, James & Kuhn, Michael A. & Sprenger, Charles, 2015. "Measuring time preferences: A comparison of experimental methods," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 116(C), pages 451-464.
    27. Brounen, Dirk & Kok, Nils & Quigley, John M., 2013. "Energy literacy, awareness, and conservation behavior of residential households," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 38(C), pages 42-50.
    28. David Laibson, 1997. "Golden Eggs and Hyperbolic Discounting," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 112(2), pages 443-478.
    29. Peter C. Reiss & Matthew W. White, 2005. "Household Electricity Demand, Revisited," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 72(3), pages 853-883.
    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. Werthschulte, Madeline, 2020. ""Pay-later" vs. "pay-as-you-go": Experimental evidence on present-biased overconsumption and the importance of timing," ZEW Discussion Papers 20-089, ZEW - Leibniz Centre for European Economic Research.
    2. Werthschulte, Madeline, 2020. ""Pay-later" vs. "pay-as-you-go": Experimental evidence on present-biased overconsumption and the importance of timing," CAWM Discussion Papers 121, University of Münster, Münster Center for Economic Policy (MEP).
    3. Casamassima, Alessia & Perdiguero Garcia, Jordi & Morone, Andrea, 2021. "Investigate the energy misperception for "Next Generation" in Italy: An online experiment," MPRA Paper 110637, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    4. Elke D. Groh & Andreas Ziegler, 2021. "On the relevance of values, norms, and economic preferences for electricity consumption," MAGKS Papers on Economics 202107, Philipps-Universität Marburg, Faculty of Business Administration and Economics, Department of Economics (Volkswirtschaftliche Abteilung).
    5. Groh, Elke D. & Ziegler, Andreas, 2020. "On the relevance of economic preferences, values, norms, and socio-demographics for electricity consumption," VfS Annual Conference 2020 (Virtual Conference): Gender Economics 224587, Verein für Socialpolitik / German Economic Association.

    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. Werthschulte, Madeline & Löschel, Andreas, 2021. "On the role of present bias and biased price beliefs in household energy consumption," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 109(C).
    2. David Bradford & Charles Courtemanche & Garth Heutel & Patrick McAlvanah & Christopher Ruhm, 2017. "Time preferences and consumer behavior," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 55(2), pages 119-145, December.
    3. Groh, Elke D. & Ziegler, Andreas, 2020. "On the relevance of economic preferences, values, norms, and socio-demographics for electricity consumption," VfS Annual Conference 2020 (Virtual Conference): Gender Economics 224587, Verein für Socialpolitik / German Economic Association.
    4. Schleich, Joachim & Gassmann, Xavier & Meissner, Thomas & Faure, Corinne, 2019. "A large-scale test of the effects of time discounting, risk aversion, loss aversion, and present bias on household adoption of energy-efficient technologies," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 80(C), pages 377-393.
    5. Schleich, Joachim & Gassmann, Xavier & Meissner, Thomas & Faure, Corinne, 2023. "Making the factors underlying the implicit discount rate tangible," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 177(C).
    6. Boonmanunt, Suparee & Lauer, Thomas & Rockenbach, Bettina & Weiss, Arne, 2020. "Field evidence on the role of time preferences in conservation behavior," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 104(C).
    7. Thomas Meissner & Xavier Gassmann & Corinne Faure & Joachim Schleich, 2023. "Individual characteristics associated with risk and time preferences: A multi country representative survey," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 66(1), pages 77-107, February.
    8. Groh, Elke D. & Ziegler, Andreas, 2022. "On the relevance of values, norms, and economic preferences for electricity consumption," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 192(C).
    9. Elke D. Groh & Andreas Ziegler, 2021. "On the relevance of values, norms, and economic preferences for electricity consumption," MAGKS Papers on Economics 202107, Philipps-Universität Marburg, Faculty of Business Administration and Economics, Department of Economics (Volkswirtschaftliche Abteilung).
    10. Fischbacher, Urs & Schudy, Simeon & Teyssier, Sabrina, 2021. "Heterogeneous preferences and investments in energy saving measures," Resource and Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 63(C).
    11. Schleich, Joachim & Gassmann, Xavier & Faure, Corinne & Meissner, Thomas, 2016. "Making the implicit explicit: A look inside the implicit discount rate," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 97(C), pages 321-331.
    12. Werthschulte, Madeline, 2023. "Present focus and billing systems: Testing ‘pay-as-you-go’ vs. ‘pay-later’," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 212(C), pages 108-121.
    13. Leonhard K. Lades & Kate Laffan & Till O. Weber, 2020. "Do economic preferences predict pro-environmental behaviour?," Working Papers 202003, Geary Institute, University College Dublin.
    14. Broberg, Thomas & Kažukauskas, Andrius, 2021. "Information policies and biased cost perceptions - The case of Swedish residential energy consumption," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 149(C).
    15. Werthschulte, Madeline, 2020. ""Pay-later" vs. "pay-as-you-go": Experimental evidence on present-biased overconsumption and the importance of timing," ZEW Discussion Papers 20-089, ZEW - Leibniz Centre for European Economic Research.
    16. Werthschulte, Madeline, 2020. ""Pay-later" vs. "pay-as-you-go": Experimental evidence on present-biased overconsumption and the importance of timing," CAWM Discussion Papers 121, University of Münster, Münster Center for Economic Policy (MEP).
    17. Jindrich Matousek & Tomas Havranek & Zuzana Irsova, 2022. "Individual discount rates: a meta-analysis of experimental evidence," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 25(1), pages 318-358, February.
    18. Heutel, Garth, 2019. "Prospect theory and energy efficiency," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 96(C), pages 236-254.
    19. Olsthoorn, Mark & Schleich, Joachim & Faure, Corinne, 2019. "Exploring the diffusion of low-energy houses: An empirical study in the European Union," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 129(C), pages 1382-1393.
    20. 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.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    energy consumption; present bias; price beliefs; field experiment;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • C93 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Design of Experiments - - - Field Experiments
    • D15 - Microeconomics - - Household Behavior - - - Intertemporal Household Choice; Life Cycle Models and Saving
    • D81 - Microeconomics - - Information, Knowledge, and Uncertainty - - - Criteria for Decision-Making under Risk and Uncertainty
    • D91 - Microeconomics - - Micro-Based Behavioral Economics - - - Role and Effects of Psychological, Emotional, Social, and Cognitive Factors on Decision Making
    • Q49 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Energy - - - Other

    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:zbw:cawmdp:111. 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: ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/camuede.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.