Archive for September, 2020

Sandro Ambühl

The first speaker (24 September) in this semester’s SWE colloquium series is Sandro Ambühl, UBS Foundation Assistant Professor of Behavioral Economics of Financial Markets at the Department of Economics at the University of Zurich. One focus of his research studies how to help people make good financial decisions. The other strand of research concerns policies for the exchange of goods about which people have strong ethical intuitions, as is the case, for example, with living organ donation, or when incentive systems place a price on the natural environment. He addresses these questions using a combination of controlled experiments and economic theory. His research has been featured in the popular press, including The Washington PostFinancial TimesThe Wall Street JournalNPR, and the Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung.

Incentives and the Quality of Decision Making

An Offer You Can’t Refuse? Experimental Tests of ‘Undue Inducement’

Around the world, laws limit incentives for transactions such as clinical trial participation, human egg donation, or gestational surrogacy. A key reason is the notion of undue inducement—the conceptually vague and empirically untested idea that incentives can lead to bad decision making by distorting individuals’ beliefs about the transaction. Three experiments show that participation incentives induce selective information search and thus alter beliefs. These changes, however, do not lower measured decision quality. They are consistent with Bayes-rational, costly information processing, which is shown to generate information acquisition that resembles motivated reasoning.

Attention and Selection Effects (with Axel Ockenfels and Colin Stewart, submitted) 

Many transactions involve uncertain but learnable consequences. Who responds more to incentives to participate, individuals who find it easier to learn about consequences or those for whom it is more difficult? We show theoretically and experimentally that incentives disproportionately attract those with high learning costs. These participants’ decisions rest on worse information, rendering ex post regret more likely. Selection based on learning costs is substantially more pronounced than selection on risk preferences in many of our treatments. Our results apply to a wide range of economic transactions and, moreover, highlight a conflict between participation incentives and ethical principle

Alles gesagt?

I discovered the podcast series “Alles gesagt?” this summer. A team of journalists interviews an “extraordinary person” until the interviewee feels everything has been said. Some of the interviews go for up to 8h! I’ve been working my way through some of the interviews and found the ones with Juli Zeh, Mai Thi Nguyen-Kim, and Luisa Neubauer quite stimulating. I found myself thinking about the crucial role of psychological science in many of the topics addressed, including the power and limits of algorithms in aiding decision making (Zeh), the communication of evidence and risk (Nguyen-Kim), and the role of changing attitudes and behaviors in addressing climate change (Neubauer). Occupational disease?

CDS is back in business!

The spring semester was tough but CDS is again open for (virtual) business and we had our first CDS Brownbag meeting via Zoom today. It was great to welcome our new MSc students and introduce them to the group!

This semester we will cover topics on data visualization and statistical rethinking in our journal club and already have a number of talks and papers lined up from CDS members. We’ll make our schedule available asap.

I’m looking forward to a productive semester!