准双曲现在性偏差:一项元分析

S. Cheung, Agnieszka Tymula, Xueting Wang
{"title":"准双曲现在性偏差:一项元分析","authors":"S. Cheung, Agnieszka Tymula, Xueting Wang","doi":"10.2139/ssrn.3909663","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Quasi-hyperbolic discounting is one of the most well-known and widely-used models to capture selfcontrol problems in the economics literature. The underlying assumption of this model is that agents have a “present bias” toward current consumption such that all future rewards are downweighed relative to rewards in the present (in addition to standard exponential discounting for the length of delay). We report a meta-analytic dataset of estimates of the present bias parameter 𝛽 based on searches of all major research databases (62 papers with 81 estimates in total). We find that the literature shows that people are on average present biased for both monetary rewards (𝛽 = 0.82%-|-| confidence interval of [0.74, 0.90]) and non- monetary rewards (𝛽 = 0.66, 95% confidence interval of [0.51, 0.85]) but that substantial heterogeneity exists across studies. The source of this heterogeneity comes from the subject pool, elicitation methodology, geographical location, payment method, mode of data collection (e.g. laboratory or field), and reward type. There is evidence of selective reporting and publication bias in the direction of overestimating the strength of present-bias (making 𝛽 estimates smaller), but present bias still exists after correcting for these issues (for money 𝛽 = 0.87 with 95% confidence interval of [0.82, 0.92] after correcting for selective reporting).","PeriodicalId":8731,"journal":{"name":"Behavioral & Experimental Finance eJournal","volume":"38 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-08-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"2","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Quasi-hyperbolic Present Bias: A Meta-analysis\",\"authors\":\"S. Cheung, Agnieszka Tymula, Xueting Wang\",\"doi\":\"10.2139/ssrn.3909663\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Quasi-hyperbolic discounting is one of the most well-known and widely-used models to capture selfcontrol problems in the economics literature. The underlying assumption of this model is that agents have a “present bias” toward current consumption such that all future rewards are downweighed relative to rewards in the present (in addition to standard exponential discounting for the length of delay). We report a meta-analytic dataset of estimates of the present bias parameter 𝛽 based on searches of all major research databases (62 papers with 81 estimates in total). We find that the literature shows that people are on average present biased for both monetary rewards (𝛽 = 0.82%-|-| confidence interval of [0.74, 0.90]) and non- monetary rewards (𝛽 = 0.66, 95% confidence interval of [0.51, 0.85]) but that substantial heterogeneity exists across studies. The source of this heterogeneity comes from the subject pool, elicitation methodology, geographical location, payment method, mode of data collection (e.g. laboratory or field), and reward type. There is evidence of selective reporting and publication bias in the direction of overestimating the strength of present-bias (making 𝛽 estimates smaller), but present bias still exists after correcting for these issues (for money 𝛽 = 0.87 with 95% confidence interval of [0.82, 0.92] after correcting for selective reporting).\",\"PeriodicalId\":8731,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Behavioral & Experimental Finance eJournal\",\"volume\":\"38 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-08-23\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"2\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Behavioral & Experimental Finance eJournal\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3909663\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Behavioral & Experimental Finance eJournal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3909663","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2

摘要

准双曲贴现是经济学文献中最著名和最广泛使用的模型之一,用于捕捉自我控制问题。该模型的基本假设是,代理对当前消费有“当前偏见”,这样所有未来的奖励相对于当前的奖励都被低估了(除了延迟长度的标准指数折扣)。我们报告了一个meta分析数据集,该数据集基于对所有主要研究数据库的搜索(62篇论文,共有81个估计)对当前偏倚参数的估计。我们发现,文献表明,人们对金钱奖励( = 0.82%-|-|置信区间为[0.74,0.90])和非金钱奖励( = 0.66, 95%置信区间为[0.51,0.85])平均存在偏见,但研究之间存在实质性的异质性。这种异质性的来源来自受试者池、启发方法、地理位置、支付方式、数据收集模式(例如实验室或现场)和奖励类型。有证据表明,选择性报道和发表偏倚倾向于高估当前偏倚的强度(使其估计较小),但在对这些问题进行校正后,当前偏倚仍然存在(对于货币,在对选择性报道进行校正后,其95%置信区间为[0.82,0.92])。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Quasi-hyperbolic Present Bias: A Meta-analysis
Quasi-hyperbolic discounting is one of the most well-known and widely-used models to capture selfcontrol problems in the economics literature. The underlying assumption of this model is that agents have a “present bias” toward current consumption such that all future rewards are downweighed relative to rewards in the present (in addition to standard exponential discounting for the length of delay). We report a meta-analytic dataset of estimates of the present bias parameter 𝛽 based on searches of all major research databases (62 papers with 81 estimates in total). We find that the literature shows that people are on average present biased for both monetary rewards (𝛽 = 0.82%-|-| confidence interval of [0.74, 0.90]) and non- monetary rewards (𝛽 = 0.66, 95% confidence interval of [0.51, 0.85]) but that substantial heterogeneity exists across studies. The source of this heterogeneity comes from the subject pool, elicitation methodology, geographical location, payment method, mode of data collection (e.g. laboratory or field), and reward type. There is evidence of selective reporting and publication bias in the direction of overestimating the strength of present-bias (making 𝛽 estimates smaller), but present bias still exists after correcting for these issues (for money 𝛽 = 0.87 with 95% confidence interval of [0.82, 0.92] after correcting for selective reporting).
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
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