Supporting pension decisions with value clarification methods or testimonials: two studies showing mixed effects on activation and feeling of preparation

Jelle Strikwerda, B. Holleman, Hans Hoeken
{"title":"Supporting pension decisions with value clarification methods or testimonials: two studies showing mixed effects on activation and feeling of preparation","authors":"Jelle Strikwerda, B. Holleman, Hans Hoeken","doi":"10.3389/frbhe.2024.1369500","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Pension participants need appropriate support when making (complex) pension decisions. Grounded in Fuzzy-Trace Theory, we argue that suitable decisions require participants to (accurately) understand meaningful differences between decision alternatives. Based on this, we investigated the effectiveness of different types of decision support for the decision when to retire.We conducted two experiments among participants of four Dutch pension funds (Study 1: N = 2,328, Study 2: N = 500) on the effectiveness of three different types of decision support: (a) a traditional pros and cons text, (b) a Value Clarification Method (VCM), and (c) testimonials.The studies showed mixed results. In the first study, we found an activating effect of the VCM and the testimonials: participants who received one of these two types of decision support were more likely to visit a web page with additional information. In the second study, we found no differences between the three types of decision support.We discuss possible explanations for the effects found, as well as implications for future (research on) pension decision support.","PeriodicalId":476280,"journal":{"name":"Frontiers in Behavioral Economics","volume":"48 7","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-06-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Frontiers in Behavioral Economics","FirstCategoryId":"0","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3389/frbhe.2024.1369500","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Pension participants need appropriate support when making (complex) pension decisions. Grounded in Fuzzy-Trace Theory, we argue that suitable decisions require participants to (accurately) understand meaningful differences between decision alternatives. Based on this, we investigated the effectiveness of different types of decision support for the decision when to retire.We conducted two experiments among participants of four Dutch pension funds (Study 1: N = 2,328, Study 2: N = 500) on the effectiveness of three different types of decision support: (a) a traditional pros and cons text, (b) a Value Clarification Method (VCM), and (c) testimonials.The studies showed mixed results. In the first study, we found an activating effect of the VCM and the testimonials: participants who received one of these two types of decision support were more likely to visit a web page with additional information. In the second study, we found no differences between the three types of decision support.We discuss possible explanations for the effects found, as well as implications for future (research on) pension decision support.
用价值澄清法或推荐信支持养老金决策:两项研究显示,对激活和准备感的影响不一
养老金参与者在做出(复杂的)养老金决策时需要适当的支持。我们以模糊跟踪理论为基础,认为适当的决策需要参与者(准确)理解决策备选方案之间有意义的差异。在此基础上,我们研究了不同类型的决策支持对何时退休决策的有效性。我们对荷兰四家养老基金的参与者进行了两次实验(研究 1:人数 = 2328 人,研究 2:人数 = 500 人),研究三种不同类型的决策支持的有效性:(a)传统的利弊文本,(b)价值澄清法(VCM),以及(c)推荐信。在第一项研究中,我们发现了价值澄清法和推荐信的激活效应:获得这两种决策支持之一的参与者更有可能访问包含更多信息的网页。在第二项研究中,我们发现三种类型的决策支持之间没有差异。我们讨论了对所发现效果的可能解释,以及对未来养老金决策支持(研究)的影响。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信