IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/zbw/i4rdps/42.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Replication Report: Concentration Bias in Intertemporal Choice

Author

Listed:
  • Deer, Lachlan
  • Ellingsrud, Sigmund
  • Kordt, Amund H.
  • Heuer, Felix

Abstract

Dertwinkel-Kalt et al. (2022) examine the effect of concentration bias - the tendency to overweight advantages that are concentrated in time relative to costs that are spread over multiple time periods - on intertemporal choice in a laboratory experiment. In their preferred empirical specification, the authors report that concentration bias leads to a 22.4% higher willingness to work than explained by a standard model of intertemporal discounting. We conduct a computational replication of the main results of the paper using the same procedures and original data. Our results confirm the sign, magnitude and statistical significance of the author’s reported estimates across each of their five main findings.

Suggested Citation

  • Deer, Lachlan & Ellingsrud, Sigmund & Kordt, Amund H. & Heuer, Felix, 2023. "Replication Report: Concentration Bias in Intertemporal Choice," I4R Discussion Paper Series 42, The Institute for Replication (I4R).
    • Handle: RePEc:zbw:i4rdps:42
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.econstor.eu/bitstream/10419/272844/1/I4R-DP042.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Botond Koszegi & Adam Szeidl, 2013. "A Model of Focusing in Economic Choice," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 128(1), pages 53-104.
    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. Gu, Yiquan & Rasch, Alexander & Wenzel, Tobias, 2022. "Consumer salience and quality provision in (un)regulated public service markets," Regional Science and Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 93(C).
    2. Olafsson, Arna & Pagel, Michaela, 2024. "Retirement puzzles: New evidence from personal finances," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 234(C).
    3. Victor Stango & Jonathan Zinman, 2014. "Limited and Varying Consumer Attention: Evidence from Shocks to the Salience of Bank Overdraft Fees," The Review of Financial Studies, Society for Financial Studies, vol. 27(4), pages 990-1030.
    4. Chen Lian & Yueran Ma & Carmen Wang, 2019. "Low Interest Rates and Risk-Taking: Evidence from Individual Investment Decisions," The Review of Financial Studies, Society for Financial Studies, vol. 32(6), pages 2107-2148.
    5. Bartosz Maćkowiak & Filip Matějka & Mirko Wiederholt, 2023. "Rational Inattention: A Review," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 61(1), pages 226-273, March.
    6. Rema Hanna & Sendhi Mullainathan & Josh Schwartstein, 2012. "Learning Through Noticing: Theory and Experimental Evidence in Farming," CID Working Papers 245, Center for International Development at Harvard University.
    7. Pedro Bordalo & Nicola Gennaioli & Andrei Shleifer, 2013. "Salience and Consumer Choice," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 121(5), pages 803-843.
    8. Chowdhury, Subhasish M. & Jewell, Sarah & Singleton, Carl, 2024. "Can awareness reduce (and reverse) identity-driven bias in judgement? Evidence from international cricket," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 226(C).
    9. Philippe Jehiel, 2022. "Analogy-Based Expectation Equilibrium and Related Concepts:Theory, Applications, and Beyond," PSE Working Papers halshs-03735680, HAL.
    10. Perroni, Carlo & Scharf, Kimberley & Talavera, Oleksandr & Vi, Linh, 2022. "Does online salience predict charitable giving? Evidence from SMS text donations," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 197(C), pages 134-149.
    11. Dertwinkel-Kalt, Markus & Riener, Gerhard, 2016. "A first test of focusing theory," DICE Discussion Papers 214, Heinrich Heine University Düsseldorf, Düsseldorf Institute for Competition Economics (DICE).
    12. Civelli, Andrea & Deck, Cary & Tutino, Antonella, 2022. "Attention and choices with multiple states and actions: A laboratory experiment," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 199(C), pages 86-102.
    13. Castillo, Geoffrey, 2020. "The attraction effect and its explanations," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 119(C), pages 123-147.
    14. Fabio Galeotti & Maria Montero & Anders Poulsen, 2022. "The Attraction and Compromise Effects in Bargaining: Experimental Evidence," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 68(4), pages 2987-3007, April.
    15. Payzan-LeNestour, Elise & Woodford, Michael, 2022. "Outlier blindness: A neurobiological foundation for neglect of financial risk," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 143(3), pages 1316-1343.
    16. Jacobs Martin, 2016. "Accounting for Changing Tastes: Approaches to Explaining Unstable Individual Preferences," Review of Economics, De Gruyter, vol. 67(2), pages 121-183, August.
    17. repec:cup:judgdm:v:16:y:2021:i:6:p:1324-1369 is not listed on IDEAS
    18. Linda Dezső & Barna Bakó & Gábor Neszveda, 2022. "Exploiting context-dependent preferences to protect borrowers," Journal of Financial Services Marketing, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 27(4), pages 291-305, December.
    19. Johannes Becker & Jonas Fooken & Melanie Steinhoff, 2019. "Behavioral Effects of Withholding Taxes on Labor Supply," Scandinavian Journal of Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 121(4), pages 1417-1440, October.
    20. Markus Dertwinkel-Kalt & Mats Köster, 2020. "Salience and Skewness Preferences [Risk-neutral Firms can Extract Unbounded Profits from Consumers with Prospect Theory Preferences]," Journal of the European Economic Association, European Economic Association, vol. 18(5), pages 2057-2107.
    21. Markus Dertwinkel‐Kalt & Mats Köster, 2022. "Attention to online sales: The role of brand image concerns," Journal of Economics & Management Strategy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 31(1), pages 64-89, February.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    concentration bias; intertemporal choice; laboratory experiment; computational replication;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • D01 - Microeconomics - - General - - - Microeconomic Behavior: Underlying Principles
    • D9 - Microeconomics - - Micro-Based Behavioral Economics

    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:i4rdps:42. 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://www.i4replication.org/ .

    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.