IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/zbw/roswps/169.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Eliciting Paternalistic Preferences: An Incentivised Experiment

Author

Listed:
  • Schütze, Tobias
  • Carlhoff, Henrik
  • Witschel, Helena

Abstract

Individual paternalistic preferences are central to the question to what extent the state may intervene in the freedom of choice of its citizens. Albeit its practical and theoretical importance, there is yet no incentivised tool to elicit those preferences. In this paper, we present a simple and abstract experiment to elicit paternalistic preferences and also investigate its relationship with individual psychological constructs that are argued to correlate with paternalistic preferences. In line with previous empirical results, our experimental data suggest that paternalistic preferences are indeed heterogeneously distributed in our sample. Moreover, we identify outcome related and autonomy related motives as important factors of paternalistic preferences. More precisely, (especially young) individuals with a strong desire for autonomy are more likely to opt for an informed choice and individuals with a strong focus on the outcome are more likely to opt for an uninformed choice than giving up their autonomy.

Suggested Citation

  • Schütze, Tobias & Carlhoff, Henrik & Witschel, Helena, 2024. "Eliciting Paternalistic Preferences: An Incentivised Experiment," Thuenen-Series of Applied Economic Theory 169, University of Rostock, Institute of Economics.
    • Handle: RePEc:zbw:roswps:169
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.econstor.eu/bitstream/10419/284362/1/wp169.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. David Tannenbaum & Craig R. Fox & Todd Rogers, 2017. "On the misplaced politics of behavioural policy interventions," Nature Human Behaviour, Nature, vol. 1(7), pages 1-7, July.
    2. Jakina Debnam, 2017. "Selection Effects and Heterogeneous Demand Responses to the Berkeley Soda Tax Vote," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 99(5), pages 1172-1187.
    3. Gangadharan, Lata & Grossman, Philip J. & Jones, Kristy & Leister, C. Matthew, 2018. "Paternalistic giving: Restricting recipient choice," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 151(C), pages 143-170.
    4. Uzma Afzal & Giovanna d'Adda & Marcel Fafchamps & Farah Said, 2022. "Intrahousehold Consumption Allocation and Demand for Agency: A Triple Experimental Investigation," American Economic Journal: Applied Economics, American Economic Association, vol. 14(3), pages 400-444, July.
    5. Hensher, David A., 2010. "Hypothetical bias, choice experiments and willingness to pay," Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Elsevier, vol. 44(6), pages 735-752, July.
    6. Marco Caliendo & Deborah A. Cobb-Clark & Cosima Obst & Helke Seitz & Arne Uhlendorff, 2022. "Locus of Control and Investment in Training," Journal of Human Resources, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 57(4), pages 1311-1349.
    7. Sofie Kragh Pedersen & Alexander K. Koch & Julia Nafziger, 2014. "Who Wants Paternalism?," Bulletin of Economic Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 66(S1), pages 147-166, December.
    8. Robert Sugden, 2005. "Anomalies and Stated Preference Techniques: A Framework for a Discussion of Coping Strategies," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 32(1), pages 1-12, September.
    9. Graeber, Daniel & Schmidt-Petri, Christoph & Schröder, Carsten, 2021. "Attitudes on voluntary and mandatory vaccination against COVID-19: Evidence from Germany," EconStor Open Access Articles and Book Chapters, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics, vol. 16(5), pages 1-18.
    10. Ernst Fehr & Holger Herz & Tom Wilkening, 2013. "The Lure of Authority: Motivation and Incentive Effects of Power," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 103(4), pages 1325-1359, June.
    11. 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.
    12. Björn Bartling & Ernst Fehr & Holger Herz, 2014. "The Intrinsic Value of Decision Rights," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 82, pages 2005-2039, November.
    13. Charness, Gary & Gneezy, Uri & Halladay, Brianna, 2016. "Experimental methods: Pay one or pay all," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 131(PA), pages 141-150.
    14. Richard H. Thaler & Cass R. Sunstein, 2023. "Libertarian paternalism," Chapters, in: Cass R. Sunstein & Lucia A. Reisch (ed.), Research Handbook on Nudges and Society, chapter 1, pages 10-16, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    15. Cobb-Clark, Deborah A. & Kassenboehmer, Sonja C. & Sinning, Mathias G., 2016. "Locus of control and savings," Journal of Banking & Finance, Elsevier, vol. 73(C), pages 113-130.
    16. Ulrich Schimmack & Jürgen Schupp & Gert Wagner, 2008. "The Influence of Environment and Personality on the Affective and Cognitive Component of Subjective Well-being," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 89(1), pages 41-60, October.
    17. Charles A. Holt & Susan K. Laury, 2002. "Risk Aversion and Incentive Effects," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 92(5), pages 1644-1655, December.
    18. Jayson L. Lusk & Stephan Marette & F. Bailey Norwood, 2014. "The Paternalist Meets His Match," Applied Economic Perspectives and Policy, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 36(1), pages 61-108.
    19. Ayala Arad & Ariel Rubinstein, 2018. "The People's Perspective on Libertarian-Paternalistic Policies," Journal of Law and Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 61(2), pages 311-333.
    20. David Owens Jr. & Zachary Grossman Jr. & Ryan Fackler Jr., 2014. "The Control Premium: A Preference for Payoff Autonomy," American Economic Journal: Microeconomics, American Economic Association, vol. 6(4), pages 138-161, November.
    21. Sandro Ambuehl & B. Douglas Bernheim & Axel Ockenfels, 2021. "What Motivates Paternalism? An Experimental Study," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 111(3), pages 787-830, March.
    22. Ted O'Donoghue & Matthew Rabin, 2003. "Studying Optimal Paternalism, Illustrated by a Model of Sin Taxes," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 93(2), pages 186-191, May.
    23. Ted O'Donoghue & Jason Somerville, 2018. "Modeling Risk Aversion in Economics," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 32(2), pages 91-114, Spring.
    24. Fredric Jacobsson & Magnus Johannesson & Lars Borgquist, 2007. "Is Altruism Paternalistic?," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 117(520), pages 761-781, April.
    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. Björn Bartling & Alexander W. Cappelen & Henning Hermes & Marit Skivenes & Bertil Tungodden, 2023. "Free to fail? Paternalistic preferences in the United States," ECON - Working Papers 436, Department of Economics - University of Zurich.
    2. Sandro Ambuehl & B. Douglas Bernheim & Axel Ockenfels, 2019. "Projective Paternalism," CESifo Working Paper Series 7762, CESifo.
    3. Freundt, Jana & Herz, Holger & KOPP, leander, 2023. "Intrinsic Preferences for Autonomy," FSES Working Papers 530, Faculty of Economics and Social Sciences, University of Freiburg/Fribourg Switzerland.
    4. Jana Freundt & Holger Herz & Leander Kopp, 2023. "Intrinsic Preferences for Choice Autonomy," CESifo Working Paper Series 10342, CESifo.
    5. Eckel, Catherine C. & Fatas, Enrique & Kass, Malcolm, 2022. "Sacrifice: An experiment on the political economy of extreme intergroup punishment," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 90(C).
    6. Marette, Stéphan & Issanchou, Sylvie & Monnery-Patris, Sandrine & Ginon, Emilie & Sutan, Angela, 2016. "Are children more paternalistic than their mothers when choosing snacks?," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 55(C), pages 61-76.
    7. Feldhaus, Christoph & Lingens, Jörg & Löschel, Andreas & Zunker, Gerald, 2024. "The intrinsic value of decision rights: Field evidence from electricity contract choice automation," Resource and Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 78(C).
    8. Staněk, Rostislav & Krčál, Ondřej & Čellárová, Katarína, 2022. "Pull yourself up by your bootstraps: Identifying procedural preferences against helping others in the presence of moral hazard," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 98(C).
    9. Tomas Sjöström & Levent Ülkü & Radovan Vadovic, 2017. "Free to Choose: Testing the Pure Motivation Effect of Autonomous Choice," Carleton Economic Papers 17-11, Carleton University, Department of Economics.
    10. Karen Evelyn Hauge & Snorre Kverndokk & Andreas Lange, 2021. "Why People Oppose Trade Institutions - On Morality, Fairness and Risky Actions," CESifo Working Paper Series 9456, CESifo.
    11. Ackfeld, Viola & Ockenfels, Axel, 2021. "Do people intervene to make others behave prosocially?," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 128(C), pages 58-72.
    12. Tobias König & Renke Schmacker, 2022. "Preferences for Sin Taxes," CESifo Working Paper Series 10046, CESifo.
    13. Kai A. Konrad, 2023. "The Political Economy of Paternalism," Working Papers tax-mpg-rps-2023-02, Max Planck Institute for Tax Law and Public Finance.
    14. Ertac, Seda & Gumren, Mert & Gurdal, Mehmet Y., 2020. "Demand for decision autonomy and the desire to avoid responsibility in risky environments: Experimental evidence," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 77(C).
    15. Peter John Robinson & W. J. Wouter Botzen & Fujin Zhou, 2021. "An experimental study of charity hazard: The effect of risky and ambiguous government compensation on flood insurance demand," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 63(3), pages 275-318, December.
    16. Kirchler, Michael & Lindner, Florian & Weitzel, Utz, 2020. "Delegated investment decisions and rankings," Journal of Banking & Finance, Elsevier, vol. 120(C).
    17. David Danz & Dorothea Kübler & Lydia Mechtenberg & Julia Schmid, 2015. "On the Failure of Hindsight-Biased Principals to Delegate Optimally," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 61(8), pages 1938-1958, August.
    18. Marc A. Ragin & Benjamin L. Collier & Johannes G. Jaspersen, 2021. "The effect of information disclosure on demand for high‐load insurance," Journal of Risk & Insurance, The American Risk and Insurance Association, vol. 88(1), pages 161-193, March.
    19. Halko, Marja-Liisa & Lappalainen, Olli & Sääksvuori, Lauri, 2021. "Do non-choice data reveal economic preferences? Evidence from biometric data and compensation-scheme choice," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 188(C), pages 87-104.
    20. Caliendo, Marco & Cobb-Clark, Deborah A. & Obst, Cosima & Uhlendorff, Arne, 2023. "Risk preferences and training investments," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 205(C), pages 668-686.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    paternalistic preferences; revealed preferences approach; psychology of decision making; autonomous decision making; paternalism; libertarianism;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • C91 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Design of Experiments - - - Laboratory, Individual Behavior
    • D91 - Microeconomics - - Micro-Based Behavioral Economics - - - Role and Effects of Psychological, Emotional, Social, and Cognitive Factors on Decision Making
    • H10 - Public Economics - - Structure and Scope of Government - - - General

    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:roswps:169. 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/ivrosde.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.