Academic Research
Meta-Analysis Examining the Relationship between Framing Effect and Risky Decisions
This study employed a meta-analysis to investigate the relationship between the framing effect and risky decisions. A systematic searched was conducted for relevant literature published in 12 electronic databases: Google Scholar, ProQuest Dissertations, Springer, Web of Science, PubMed, EBSCO, Elsevier SDOL, Chongqing VIP Information Co., WANFANG DATA, Chinese Selected Doctoral Dissertations and Master's Theses Full-Text Databases, and the China National Knowledge Infrastructure. A total of 40 relevant studies were identified, comprising a sample of 17,416 participants. The analysis employing the random-effects model revealed a statistically significant main effect of the framing effect on risky decisions (OR = 2.467). The moderator effect analysis revealed that problem domains and age served as moderating factors in the relationship between risky decisions and the framing effect, respectively. Culture, however, did not exert a moderating influence on the framing effect or risky decision-making. Specifically, individuals exhibited heightened susceptibility to the framing effect when making risky decisions in the problem domain of life-death, as compared to the problem domains of study and money. Adolescents, in contrast, were more vulnerable to the framing effect in making risky decisions than adulthood.
Paper Link: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.socec.2025.102351
Authors: Xiaoqian Ding, Menghan Li, Junyi Qiao
ABSTRACT
This study employed a meta-analysis to investigate the relationship between the framing effect and risky decisions. A systematic searched was conducted for relevant literature published in 12 electronic databases: Google Scholar, ProQuest Dissertations, Springer, Web of Science, PubMed, EBSCO, Elsevier SDOL, Chongqing VIP Information Co., WANFANG DATA, Chinese Selected Doctoral Dissertations and Master's Theses Full-Text Databases, and the China National Knowledge Infrastructure. A total of 40 relevant studies were identified, comprising a sample of 17,416 participants. The analysis employing the random-effects model revealed a statistically significant main effect of the framing effect on risky decisions (OR = 2.467). The moderator effect analysis revealed that problem domains and age served as moderating factors in the relationship between risky decisions and the framing effect, respectively. Culture, however, did not exert a moderating influence on the framing effect or risky decision-making. Specifically, individuals exhibited heightened susceptibility to the framing effect when making risky decisions in the problem domain of life-death, as compared to the problem domains of study and money. Adolescents, in contrast, were more vulnerable to the framing effect in making risky decisions than adulthood.
Praise and Cooperation: Investigating the Effects of Praise Content and Agency
How group members’ perceptions of each other’s actions influence cooperative behaviour over time remains uncertain. This study explored the effects of praise (praise content and agency) on cooperation in a two-player public goods game through one pilot experiment and three experiments. The results indicated that both process-focused and person-focused praise enhanced cooperative behaviours. Notably, participants exhibited higher levels of cooperation under process-focused praise compared to person-focused praise. Additionally, the act of expressing praise led to more cooperative behaviour than merely receiving praise or no praise at all. Overall, these findings underscore the efficacy of process-focused praise in promoting cooperation, with the expression of praise proving more effective than its reception. These insights suggest practical applications in organizational and educational settings, where implementing strategies that emphasize process-focused praise and encourage the active expression of appreciation could significantly enhance cooperative dynamics and team performance.
Paper Link: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.socec.2025.102348
Authors: Jieyu Lv, Hongchuan Zhang, Yonghong Yu, Zhiyang Xue, Yulin Cai, Zixi Luo
ABSTRACT
How group members’ perceptions of each other’s actions influence cooperative behaviour over time remains uncertain. This study explored the effects of praise (praise content and agency) on cooperation in a two-player public goods game through one pilot experiment and three experiments. The results indicated that both process-focused and person-focused praise enhanced cooperative behaviours. Notably, participants exhibited higher levels of cooperation under process-focused praise compared to person-focused praise. Additionally, the act of expressing praise led to more cooperative behaviour than merely receiving praise or no praise at all. Overall, these findings underscore the efficacy of process-focused praise in promoting cooperation, with the expression of praise proving more effective than its reception. These insights suggest practical applications in organizational and educational settings, where implementing strategies that emphasize process-focused praise and encourage the active expression of appreciation could significantly enhance cooperative dynamics and team performance.
Behavioral Rebound Effect and Moral Compensation: an Online Experiment
This paper investigates the behavioral rebound effect as defined by Dorner (2019) in an analytical framework where individuals have environmental preferences. We also study the impact of moral compensation (moral licensing and moral cleansing) on pro-environmental behavior. We propose a theoretical model that integrates behavioral and emotional factors and we conduct an online experiment with 1622 subjects to test our hypotheses. Our findings indicate that a decrease in the marginal damage of a polluting good leads to a decrease in individual’s pro-environmental behavior. This result confirms the existence of the behavioral rebound effect. Additionally, our results show that the moral cleansing effect positively influences pro-environmental behavior, especially among individuals with the strongest environmental attitudes.
Paper Link: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.socec.2025.102347
Authors: Simon Mathex, Lisette Hafkamp Ibanez, Raphaële Préget
ABSTRACT
This paper investigates the behavioral rebound effect as defined by Dorner (2019) in an analytical framework where individuals have environmental preferences. We also study the impact of moral compensation (moral licensing and moral cleansing) on pro-environmental behavior. We propose a theoretical model that integrates behavioral and emotional factors and we conduct an online experiment with 1622 subjects to test our hypotheses. Our findings indicate that a decrease in the marginal damage of a polluting good leads to a decrease in individual’s pro-environmental behavior. This result confirms the existence of the behavioral rebound effect. Additionally, our results show that the moral cleansing effect positively influences pro-environmental behavior, especially among individuals with the strongest environmental attitudes.
Revisiting the Dunning-kruger Effect: Composite Measures and Heterogeneity by Gender
The Dunning-Kruger effect (DKE) states that people with lower levels of the ability tend to self-assess their ability less accurately than people with relatively higher levels of the ability. Thus, the correlation between one's objective cognitive abilities and self-assessed abilities is higher at higher levels of objective cognitive abilities. There has been much debate as to whether this effect actually exists or is a statistical artefact. This paper replicates and extends Gignac and Zajenkowski (2020) and Dunkel, Nedelec, and van der Linden (2023) to test whether the DKE exists using several measures of ability and nationally representative data from a British birth cohort study. To do this, we construct a measure of objective cognitive abilities using 18 tests conducted at ages 5, 10, and 16, and a measure of subjective self-assessed abilities using estimates of school performance and being clever at ages 10 and 16. We replicate their models and show that the DKE exists in our secondary data. Importantly, we are the first to look at whether this relationship is heterogeneous by gender and find that while the self-assessment bias is gender specific, the DKE is not. The DKE comes from men relatively overestimating and women relatively underestimating their abilities.
Paper Link: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.socec.2025.102362
Authors: Anna Adamecz, Radina Ilieva, Nikki Shure
ABSTRACT
The Dunning-Kruger effect (DKE) states that people with lower levels of the ability tend to self-assess their ability less accurately than people with relatively higher levels of the ability. Thus, the correlation between one's objective cognitive abilities and self-assessed abilities is higher at higher levels of objective cognitive abilities. There has been much debate as to whether this effect actually exists or is a statistical artefact. This paper replicates and extends Gignac and Zajenkowski (2020) and Dunkel, Nedelec, and van der Linden (2023) to test whether the DKE exists using several measures of ability and nationally representative data from a British birth cohort study. To do this, we construct a measure of objective cognitive abilities using 18 tests conducted at ages 5, 10, and 16, and a measure of subjective self-assessed abilities using estimates of school performance and being clever at ages 10 and 16. We replicate their models and show that the DKE exists in our secondary data. Importantly, we are the first to look at whether this relationship is heterogeneous by gender and find that while the self-assessment bias is gender specific, the DKE is not. The DKE comes from men relatively overestimating and women relatively underestimating their abilities.
Testing Models of Complexity Aversion
In this study we aim to test behavioural models of complexity aversion. In this framework, complexity is defined as a function of the number of outcomes in a lottery. Using Bayesian inference techniques, we re-analyse data from a lottery-choice experiment. We quantitatively specify and estimate adaptive toolbox models of cognition, which we rigorously test against popular expectation-based models; modified to account for complexity aversion. We find that for the majority of the subjects, a toolbox model performs best both in-sample, and with regards to its predictive capacity out-of-sample, suggesting that individuals resort to heuristics in the presense of extreme complexity.
Paper Link: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.socec.2025.102354
Authors: Konstantinos Georgalos, Nathan Nabil
ABSTRACT
In this study we aim to test behavioural models of complexity aversion. In this framework, complexity is defined as a function of the number of outcomes in a lottery. Using Bayesian inference techniques, we re-analyse data from a lottery-choice experiment. We quantitatively specify and estimate adaptive toolbox models of cognition, which we rigorously test against popular expectation-based models; modified to account for complexity aversion. We find that for the majority of the subjects, a toolbox model performs best both in-sample, and with regards to its predictive capacity out-of-sample, suggesting that individuals resort to heuristics in the presense of extreme complexity.
The Napoleon Complex Revisited: New Evidence From Professional Soccer
We analyze evaluation biases caused by physical attributes. Using data from German elite soccer, we find that referees are more inclined to sanction players when the difference in body size is sufficiently large. Moreover, we document an ‘inverse Napoleon effect’ in situations when the referee is confronted with smaller players, suggesting that sanctions are used as a substitute for authority gained by stature in the industry. Further analyses reveal that referees discriminate less against more talented players and teams with a higher concentration of these players. Finally, we find that the bias is reduced but still exists for the group of more experienced referees.
Paper Link: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2214804325000199?dgcid=rss_sd_all
Authors: Giulio Callegaro, Mario Lackner, Hendrik Sonnabend
ABSTRACT
We analyze evaluation biases caused by physical attributes. Using data from German elite soccer, we find that referees are more inclined to sanction players when the difference in body size is sufficiently large. Moreover, we document an ‘inverse Napoleon effect’ in situations when the referee is confronted with smaller players, suggesting that sanctions are used as a substitute for authority gained by stature in the industry. Further analyses reveal that referees discriminate less against more talented players and teams with a higher concentration of these players. Finally, we find that the bias is reduced but still exists for the group of more experienced referees.
Comparing Transparent and Covert Nudges: A Meta-Analysis Calling for More Diversity in Nudge Transparency Research
Do transparent and non-transparent nudges have similar effects? The question is central in recent research on behavioural public policy, as it leads to ethical and practical implications regarding policy-maker responsibility, citizen agency, and nudge design. We meta-analysed results from 23 publications designed to compare transparent to covert nudges including 117 effect sizes and found a positive effect of transparency on behavioural outcomes, but no effect on non-behavioural outcomes. The moderator analyses revealed that studies conducted online, manipulating the decision structure, and conducted in the domain ‘other’ tended to exhibit significantly positive transparency effects for behavioural outcomes. We note that all but two studies were conducted online or in the lab, and that there is an over-representation of research on default nudges (88% of total effects), severely limiting the generalizability of the findings. Thus, we call for an improvement of research conducted on transparent nudges and the inclusion of more nudge types, preferably in a field setting. We also stress the importance of defining the form of transparency that societies require for respecting their citizen's autonomy.
Do transparent and non-transparent nudges have similar effects? The question is central in recent research on behavioural public policy, as it leads to ethical and practical implications regarding policy-maker responsibility, citizen agency, and nudge design. We meta-analysed results from 23 publications designed to compare transparent to covert nudges including 117 effect sizes and found a positive effect of transparency on behavioural outcomes, but no effect on non-behavioural outcomes. The moderator analyses revealed that studies conducted online, manipulating the decision structure, and conducted in the domain ‘other’ tended to exhibit significantly positive transparency effects for behavioural outcomes. We note that all but two studies were conducted online or in the lab, and that there is an over-representation of research on default nudges (88% of total effects), severely limiting the generalizability of the findings. Thus, we call for an improvement of research conducted on transparent nudges and the inclusion of more nudge types, preferably in a field setting. We also stress the importance of defining the form of transparency that societies require for respecting their citizen's autonomy.