Discounting of Environmental Goods and Discounting in Social Contexts David J. Hardisty 1 ; Kerry F. Milch 1 ; Kirstin Appelt 1 ; Michel J. J. Handgraaf.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Judgment & Decision Making Based on High Consumer Effort
Advertisements

Discounting How should the future benefits of a project be weighed against present costs?
Task: How do you budget your time in a typical weekday? Use today for example, and write down how you divided the time you had during the day? Would you.
I Want It Now!: Query Theory Explains Discounting Anomalies for Gains and Losses Kirstin C. Appelt 1 David J. Hardisty 2 Elke U. Weber 1 1 Columbia University.
Time Horizons in Interdependent Security David J. Hardisty, Howard Kunreuther, David H. Krantz, & Poonam Arora Columbia University & University of Pennsylvania.
1 Chapter 12 Value of Information. 2 Chapter 12, Value of information Learning Objectives: Probability and Perfect Information The Expected Value of Information.
Welcome and thanks for participating! You will receive: €10 for participation + additional prize. The additional prize comes from an envelope you will.
Does Prospect Theory Hold in Intertemporal Choice? The interaction of time and risk in preferences for gains and losses David J. Hardisty & Jeff Pfeffer.
Method Introduction Discussion Results Discounting of Delayed and Probabilistic Rewards in Gambling and Non-gambling College Students Rochelle R. Smits,
Decision making and economics. Economic theories Economic theories provide normative standards Expected value Expected utility Specialized branches like.
Judgment and Decision Making How Rational Are We?.

How to measure discount rates? An experimental comparison of three methods David Hardisty, Katherine Thompson, Dave Krantz, & Elke Weber Columbia University.
Decision-making II choosing between gambles neural basis of decision-making.
Do we always make the best possible decisions?
Extensions to Consumer theory Inter-temporal choice Uncertainty Revealed preferences.
263 US residents completed the study over the internet, making hypothetical choices between immediate and future monetary and environmental gains (within-subjects.
Class 4 Benefit Cost Analysis
Time Value of Money Chapter 5.
Second World Congress on Positive Psychology (July 23-26, 2011; Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, USA) Choice as self-orientation activity in real life situations.
Learning Incentive Schemes for the Working Poor Catherine Eckel University of Texas, Dallas Cathleen Johnson CIrANO Claude Montmarquette University of.
Discounting How should the future benefits of a project be weighed against present costs?
Tackling temporal tradeoffs in energy efficiency David J. Hardisty Behavioural Sustainability Group Oct 21, 2014.
Please turn off cell phones, pagers, etc. The lecture will begin shortly.
Decision making Making decisions Optimal decisions Violations of rationality.
Temporal Discounting of Losses David Hardisty UBC Presentation.
Econ 384 Intermediate Microeconomics II Instructor: Lorne Priemaza
Thinking and Decision Making
Decision Making choice… maximizing utility framing effects
Priming the ant or the grasshopper in people’s mind: How regulatory mode affects inter- temporal choices Lucia Mannetti*, Susanne Leder**, Libera Insalata*,
Unit 4 – Capital Budgeting Decision Methods
Temporal Discounting of Various Items to Examine Characteristics that Affect Rate of Discounting Kathryn R. Haugle, Rochelle R. Smits, & Daniel D. Holt.
Reinforcers and Punishers versus Incentives Reinforcers and punishers refer to good and bad behavior consequences.
Can Money Buy Happiness? Evidence from the Discounting of Uncertain Happiness Tracy A. Tufenk & Daniel D. Holt Psychology Department, University of Wisconsin-Eau.
Introduction Results A New Method for Quantifying Outcomes in Discounting Rochelle R. Smits, Matthew H. Newquist & Daniel D. Holt University of Wisconsin-Eau.
Contingent Valuation Methods See Boardman et al., Chapter 14 Interview individuals to elicit their preferences for different states of the world. Based.
Decision Making choice… maximizing utility framing effects.
Playing the Lottery 6/4/2016Copyright © 2010… REMTECH, inc … All Rights Reserved1 Probability Theory and the Lottery ● The Lottery picks numbers at random.
Framing Interacts With Political Affiliation to Predict Environmentally-Relevant Purchase Preferences David J. Hardisty, Eric J. Johnson & Elke U. Weber.
Buying and Selling Prices under Risk, Ambiguity and Conflict Michael Smithson The Australian National University Paul D. Campbell Australian Bureau of.
Lecture 3 on Individual Optimization Uncertainty Up until now we have been treating bidders as expected wealth maximizers, and in that way treating their.
We report an empirical study of buying and selling prices for three kinds of gambles: Risky (with known probabilities), Ambiguous (with lower and upper.
Do donors raise their donations when they are aware of decreasing government subsidies? A survey experiment Arjen de Wit & René Bekkers 7 th ERNOP Conference.
1 Business System Analysis & Decision Making - Lecture 4 Zhangxi Lin ISQS 5340 July 2006.
Measuring the impact of uncertainty resolution Mohammed Abdellaoui CNRS-GRID, ESTP & ENSAM, France Enrico Diecidue & Ayse Onçüler INSEAD, France ESA conference,
Encouraging Energy Efficiency: Product Labels Facilitate Temporal Tradeoffs David J. Hardisty, University of British Columbia Yoonji Shim, University of.
A Dirty Word or a Dirty World? Framing, Politics, and Query Theory David J. Hardisty, Eric J. Johnson & Elke U. Weber Columbia University Method Abstract.
Temporal Discounting of Various Gift Cards Kathryn R. Glodowski, Rochelle R. Smits, & Daniel D. Holt Psychology Department, University of Wisconsin-Eau.
Extensions to Consumer theory Inter-temporal choice Uncertainty Revealed preferences.
The Secrets of Saving. Congratulations! You have two job offers! POD…which option would you choose? Option 1: For the first twenty days of work, you will.
Parallel Temporal & Probabilistic Discounting of Costs Stephen Jones & Mike Oaksford July 2009.
Risk Efficiency Criteria Lecture XV. Expected Utility Versus Risk Efficiency In this course, we started with the precept that individual’s choose between.
The Value of Nothing: Asymmetric Attention to Opportunity Costs Drives Intertemporal Decision Making David J. Hardisty University of British Columbia Society.
IntroductionMethodResultsConclusions AGE RELATED STIGMA Decrements in the self-control in older adults has been attributed to normal age related declines.
The bright side of dread: Anticipation asymmetries explain why losses are discounted less than gains 1 David Hardisty University of British Columbia SCP.
Encouraging Energy Efficiency: Product Labels Facilitate Temporal Tradeoffs David J. Hardisty, University of British Columbia Yoonji Shim, University of.
David J. Hardisty, University of British Columbia
David J. Hardisty, University of British Columbia
A Psychophysical Approach to Discounting: Sex and Money
The bright side of dread: Anticipation asymmetries explain why losses are discounted less than gains David Hardisty UBC S&P Workshop Jan 9th, 2017.
Matthew H. Newquist and Daniel D. Holt
David J. Hardisty, University of British Columbia
Rational Decisions and
Making decisions using mathematics
The bright side of dread: Anticipation asymmetries explain why losses are discounted less than gains David Hardisty UBC Sauder ACR 2016, Berlin.
Choices, Values and Frames
The Sign Effect in Past and Future Discounting
Discounting Future Benefits and Costs
The Sign Effect in Past and Future Discounting
High School Financial Planning Program
Presentation transcript:

Discounting of Environmental Goods and Discounting in Social Contexts David J. Hardisty 1 ; Kerry F. Milch 1 ; Kirstin Appelt 1 ; Michel J. J. Handgraaf 2 ; Poonam Arora 1 ; David H. Krantz 1 ; Elke Weber 1 1 Columbia University 2 University of Amsterdam SJDM Annual Meeting 11/17/2007

How Are Environmental Outcomes Different From Monetary Outcomes? ► Many people are affected ► Social goals ► Difficult to quantify ► Ambiguous probabilities ► Often longer time horizon ► Often less domain familiarity

Study Objectives ► Compare discount rates for environmental and monetary outcomes when equalizing the previous factors as much as possible ► Compare with health discounting ► See if typical framing manipulations affect discounting of environmental outcomes

Experimental Overview ► 2 Studies ► 184 US residents, recruited & run online ► Within subjects designs ► Hypothetical monetary, environmental & health scenarios ► DV: transformed discount factor, -lnδ

Monetary Gain Scenario Imagine you just won a lottery, worth $250, which will be paid to you immediately. However, the lottery commission is giving you the option of receiving a different amount, paid to you one year from now. Imagine you just won a lottery, worth $250, which will be paid to you immediately. However, the lottery commission is giving you the option of receiving a different amount, paid to you one year from now.

Indifference Point Elicitation ► Please fill in the number that would make you indifferent between the following two options: A. Win $250 immediately. B. Win $ one year from now. ► Please choose which option you prefer in each pair: [ ] Win $250 immediately [ ] Win $410 one year from now. [ ] Win $250 immediately [ ] Win $390 one year from now. [ ] Win $250 immediately [ ] Win $370 one year from now

Indifference Point Elicitation ► Please fill in the number that would make you indifferent between the following two options: A. Win $250 immediately. B. Win $ 380 one year from now. [ ] Win $250 immediately [x] Win $410 one year from now. [ ] Win $250 immediately [x] Win $390 one year from now. [x] Win $250 immediately [ ] Win $370 one year from now ► Please choose which option you prefer in each pair:

Monetary Loss Scenario Imagine you just got a parking fine for $250 … Imagine you just got a parking fine for $250 …

Air Quality Scenarios ► Imagine the current air quality in your area is moderate ► Temporary emissions regulation test will immediately improve [worsen] air quality for 3 weeks ► Alternately, the test may be carried out one year from now, for a different length of time ► We are interested in your preference, as someone who will be personally affected by it

Indifference Point Elicitation ► Please choose which option you prefer in each pair: [ ] Improved air quality immediately, for 21 days. [ ] Improved air quality one year from now, for 37 days. [ ] Improved air quality immediately, for 21 days. [ ] Improved air quality one year from now, for 35 days. [ ] Improved air quality immediately, for 21 days. [ ] Improved air quality one year from now, for 33 days Please fill in the number that would make you indifferent between the following two options: A. Improved air quality immediately, for 21 days. B. Improved air quality one year from now, for ____ days.

Other Scenarios ► Improvement in mass transit ► Garbage piling up in the streets Study 2: ► Air Quality Index (rather than # of days) ► Health Gains and Losses (Chapman, 1996)

Study 1: Results $+$-air+air-transit+garbage- Scenario Mean Negative Ln Delta

Study 1: Results $+$-air+air-transit+garbage- Scenario Mean Negative Ln Delta *** *** p <.001

Study 1: Results $+$-air+air-transit+garbage- Scenario Mean Negative Ln Delta *** *** p <.001

Study 1: Results $+$-air+air-transit+garbage- Scenario Mean Negative Ln Delta *** *** p <.001

Study 2: Results $+$-air+air-health+health- Scenario Mean Negative Ln Delta

Study 2: Results $+$-air+air-health+health- Scenario Mean Negative Ln Delta *** p <.001 ***

Study 2: Results $+$-air+air-health+health- Scenario Mean Negative Ln Delta *** p <.001 ***

Study 2: Results $+$-air+air-health+health- Scenario Mean Negative Ln Delta *** *** p <.001

Study 2: Results $+$-air+air-health+health- Scenario Mean Negative Ln Delta ** p <.01 *** p <.001 ** ***

Study 2: Results $+$-air+air-health+health- Scenario Mean Negative Ln Delta ** p <.01 *** p <.001 ** *** **

Study 2: Discount Correlations $ + $ - Air + Air - Health + Health - $ + $ Air +.39 *** -.03 Air Health +.39 *** Health ** *** ** = p <.01, *** = p <.001

Study 2: Discount Correlations $ + $ - Air + Air - Health + Health - $ + $ Air +.39 *** -.03 Air Health +.39 *** Health ** *** ** = p <.01, *** = p <.001

Study 2: Discount Correlations $ + $ - Air + Air - Health + Health - $ + $ Air +.39 *** -.03 Air Health +.39 *** Health ** *** ** = p <.01, *** = p <.001

Study 2: Discount Correlations $ + $ - Air + Air - Health + Health - $ + $ Air +.39 *** -.03 Air Health +.39 *** Health ** *** ** = p <.01, *** = p <.001

Discussion ► When equalizing as many factors as possible, environmental outcomes discounted similarly to monetary outcomes ► Interpretation: Participants applied their strategies for monetary choices to the environmental situations ► Gain/loss framing effects much more important than domain/topic ► Discount rates constructed based on contextual features

Intertemporal Choice Predecided vs. Naïve Groups ► Participants: 3-person groups  Drawn from campus clubs, organizations, & offices  N = 33  2 conditions: predecided vs. naïve ► Task: decide whether to accept small additional $ today or to wait for larger sum to be delivered in 3 months  Split evenly among group members  Group decision binding ► Frame: delay vs. accelerate  Delay: $65 today or more in 3 months (up to $120)  Accelerate: $75 in 3 months or smaller amount today (as low as $20)

Intertemporal Choice You have won a $65 ($75) check which will be divided evenly among the people in your group and given to each of you at the end of this experiment (in 3 months). However, you could receive a larger amount 3 months from today (smaller amount today).

Prize Money Task ► $65 Today ► ??? In Three Months Remember that the amount of the money that you receive today is $65. How large would the amount of money in the second envelope (that you would receive in 3 months) have to be before you would prefer the second envelope?

Discounting by Frame & Condition * * p <.05

Thanks to... ► Elke Weber & Dave Krantz ► The CRED & PAM labs ► The Center for the Decision Sciences ► The National Science Foundation ► Research Assistants: Aleksandra Petrović, Tara Wedin, & Jill Colvin

Thank You!

References Chapman, G. B. (1996). Temporal Discounting and Utility for Health and Money. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 22,