Subscribe to our RSS feed
EconLife.com connects economics to everyday life, current events and history.

Tag Archives: decision-making

Decisions Have An Opportunity Cost That Require Tradeoffs

With Election Economics having concluded, for the next 4 weeks, Monday posts will focus on topics that relate to behavioral economics.

Let’s start with Hurricane Sandy and my own NJ neighborhood. Really though, we will be looking at how many of us manage risk.

After August 2011 Hurricane Irene, I lost power for 8 days and assumed it would never happen again. Less than 2 months later, with the October 2011 snowstorm, I again lost power for 8 days. After the second storm, my perception of the risk of losing power had changed and I soon decided to purchase a residential generator.

Economics Nobel Laureate, psychologist Daniel Kahneman explained my behavior. First of all, displaying “availability bias,” I began to overestimate the probability of an event because I could recall and therefore imagine it much more clearly.

And then I became a part of an “availability cascade” through which a public reaction conveys growing alarm about a future unpredictable event. Last year, I participated in “availability cascade” within my own neighborhood. Seeing an increasing number of neighbors purchase generators, I believed a generator was necessary. Had I looked at the probability of such an event during a longer time frame, I might have concluded it was not as likely.

Now, after Hurricane Sandy, many more of us might be reacting to an “availability bias” and “availability cascade.”

Describing the businesses that benefit from disasters, a lead article in the NY Times Sunday Business section reported that residential generator sales are soaring. At Wisconsin based Generac Power Systems, they are running 3 shifts 6 days a week to meet the change in demand from Sandy. One NJ contractor says he is booked through January 8 and has 4 or 5 neighbors appear when he arrives to give an estimate at a home. Are we observing examples of post-Hurricane Sandy availability bias–overestimating future probability–and availability cascade–emotional public reaction that spreads?

And a final fact: Availability bias and cascade worked in my favor. For Hurricane Sandy, I had a generator back-up when we lost power for 12 days. After other natural and manmade disasters though, they have resulted in a misallocation of public and private resources.

Sources and Resources: You can read the NY Times article, “The Mad Max Economy,” here while my behavioral economics analysis is based on sections of the Daniel Kahneman book, Thinking Fast and Slow.

Posted by: adminEcon
Tags: , , , , , , , , , ,
Comments (0) Add a Comment

Decisions Have An Opportunity Cost That Require Tradeoffs

President Obama says he wears only gray or blue suits. As for meals, he prefers having others decide what he will eat. The reason? “Choice fatigue.” Knowing that decision-making requires energy, the President told writer Michael Lewis that he tries not to think about what he will wear and what he will eat. He saves his energy for the important stuff.

Researchers have confirmed that we start to take shortcuts after making up our minds too many times. In one study, voters react to the same proposition differently, depending on its position on the ballot. The higher the proposition, the less likely we will select a “decision short-cut” like maintaining the status quo. For cars, observers noted that when asked to choose among “4 styles of gearshift knobs, 13 kinds of wheel rims, 25 configurations of the engine and gearbox and a palette of 56 colors for the interior,” people got too worn out and turned to the default option.

Prior decisions affect how much energy we have for future decisions.

As a result, if you are president (or just planning your own productive day), you do not want to use up your decision making energy on clothing and food. As an auto dealer, you might want to start with multiple options so that buyers opt for the default (and more pricey) alternative. Perhaps we can even attribute some of the housing debacle to “choice fatigue.” Mortgage agreement were so complex, that buyers just took the easiest route.

Sources and Resources: I especially recommend Michael Lewis’s Vanity Fair article on President Obama and John’s Tierney’s NY Times Magazine article on decision fatigue. For additional academic details about decision fatigue studies, you might further enjoy this paper.

Posted by: adminEcon
Tags: , , , , , , , , ,
Comments (0) Add a Comment

Decisions Have An Opportunity Cost That Require Tradeoffs

By Mira Korber, guest blogger.

Why might have most notorious fraudsters committed their crimes? The traditional answer seems obvious: severe character flaws, lack of ethics, unbridled greed. But there may be more to the picture than simply this “bad person.”

In a recent Planet Money podcast, economist Lamar Pierce of Washington University in St. Louis set out to discuss why people make unethical decisions. The story in question refers to Toby Groves, a seemingly upstanding citizen who later committed multimillion-dollar fraud crimes. Upon discovering his mortgage company was $250,000 in debt, Groves decided to mortgage his own home. Lying to the bank, he said his income was $350,000 when it wasn’t even close to that number. Later on, Groves needed more, so he solicited the” help” of his employees and a title company to fabricate and verify “air loans” — made-up mortgages for made-up people. Every employee he asked and the title company colluded with no hesitation.

Incentives are clearly at the heart of illegal decision making such as this; Groves needed to get his business out of debt and back on track however he could. When he sought help, it was readily available; perhaps his employees feared losing their jobs, or anticipated a bonus for “helping” to preserve the company.

According to Pierce, and a second economist on the podcast, Francesca Gino, decisions to help Groves were made because a short-term “favor” seemed far more tangible than potential future repercussions. Additionally, Gino theorized that as human beings naturally “like” each other, they are prone to assisting even immoral behavior.

This analysis brings me to Adam Smith’s The Theory of Moral Sentiments. Smith argues that a mutual sympathy between human beings causes us to empathize with each other, simply because “how selfish soever man may be supposed, there are evidently some principles in his nature, which interest him in the fortune of others, and render their happiness necessary to him…” Smith continues, “the greatest ruffian, the most hardened violator of the laws of society, is not altogether without it,” “it” being a sense of kindred emotion.

Perhaps that shared feeling is what actually prompts said “ruffian” to perpetrate group fraud. We empathize through a self-centered perspective; only by imagining ourselves in equal agony can we feel sympathy for the one suffering in reality:

As we have no immediate experience of what other men feel, we can form no idea of the manner in which they are affected, but by conceiving what we ourselves should feel in the like situation. Though our brother is upon the rack, as long as we ourselves are at our ease, our senses will never inform us of what he suffers…By the imagination we place ourselves in his situation, we conceive ourselves enduring all the same torments…and thence form some idea of his sensations, and even feel something which, though weaker in degree, is not altogether unlike them. His agonies, when they are thus brought home to ourselves, when we have thus adopted and made them our own, begin at last to affect us…

Imagining ourselves “on the rack” might help us make a bad choice — say — fabricating mortgage papers?

The Bottom Line: While fraud predictably leads to questioning of the perpetrator(s)’ incentives, it also relates to a basic psychological tendency: mutual sympathy among people who identify with each other, or offering “favors” expected to be returned in the future.  Therefore, favors are not altruistic, but may be motivated by a mutual financial dependency later on.

Related Sources: Find the Planet Money podcast “Why People Do Bad Things” here. Adam Smith, here. And for a previous Econlife post on cheating, here. You also may wish to read “How We Decide” by Jonah Lehrer, which received a favorable NY Times review, and is on my future reading list.

Posted by: adminEcon
Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,
Comments (0) Add a Comment

16282_4.1_000001571260XSmall

A recent article in Scientific American cited a correlation between altitude and attitude. Describing four different experiments, researchers concluded that physical elevation seemed to connect to generosity, kindness, and cooperation.

This is what they found:

1. At a mall, shoppers who had gone up an escalator gave more to the Salvation Army than those who traveled down.

2. In a theater, people who went up to the stage were more likely to volunteer to fill in a questionnaire than those taken down to the orchestra pit.

3. Asked how much “painfully” hot sauce to give participants in a supposed food tasting study, people up on a stage gave less than those distributing the sauce in the orchestra pit.

4. For a computer game involving cooperation, people who had just watched scenes from an airplane were more agreeable than those who had looked through a car window.

The Economic Lesson

The popular books written by Duke economist Dan Ariely and the work of Princeton psychologist Daniel Kahneman who won the Nobel Prize in economics remind us that economics and psychology intertwine.

Similarly, by relating self-interest to altitude and attitude, we can again see the psychological territory that economics can occupy.

 

 

Posted by: adminEcon
Tags: , , ,
Comments (0) Add a Comment