Trivialization and Public Opinion by Oldrich Bubak & Henry Jacek

Author:Oldrich Bubak & Henry Jacek
Language: eng
Format: epub
ISBN: 9783030179250
Publisher: Springer International Publishing

What Can We Learn?

Above, we have discussed briefly select biases with a question in mind: Are we hopeless captives of these limitations or can we, as individuals or citizens, get past them and make better decisions? A recent study from Jacobs and Matthews (2012) examining citizen policy preferences offers a reason for optimism. Jacobs and Matthews set out to explain citizens’ intertemporal decision making —choices requiring the weighing of cost and benefits occurring over time—in the policy arena. More specifically, they wanted to know the reasons and conditions under which individuals time-discount public policy outcomes. It is important to note their hypotheses assumed the participants were privy to policy costs and benefits over time. To satisfy this assumption, the authors exposed them to adequate and clear information, which also allowed for a manipulation of timing and causal complexity. More specifically, they tested for what is essentially a trivialized, “low complexity,” condition. The respondents in this group “read additional statements citing expert consensus that the reform would be simple to implement and stating that similar plans had been carried out before” (Jacobs and Matthews 2012, 913). On the other hand, respondents in the control group were given no information on process complexity. The policy examined was the US Social Security, a contributory national public pension program funded largely through payroll taxes, expected to come under financial strain with the retiring cohort. In line with the study design, the authors thus provided the subjects with the necessary background, described the financial issues facing this program, and outlined the (future) costs of inaction. They also communicated the trade-offs behind the policy options and reiterated the reforms would not fully address all Social Security issues.

The authors’ analysis yields some surprising findings. Contrary to what may be expected from this line of research in behavioral economics and cognitive psychology, the analysis shows little support for positive time preference or consumption smoothing as the discounting mechanisms. Rather, the data indicate that citizens’ bias for the short-term policy benefits is rooted in their perceptions of credibility of both political commitments and the reliability of policy processes. In sum, whether as consumers or voters, people are often subject to various cognitive limitations and biases. Jacobs and Matthews’ study points out, however, that informed citizens can reason differently. While they manifest time discounting, it is due less to their positive time preference than to the recognition of the complexities of policy processes and their distrust in politics. The importance of these findings goes beyond finance, as “much of human social life—our morality, our relationships—revolves around challenges posed by intertemporal choice” (DeSteno 2018). There is thus hope that information strategies and education may have a key role in helping us overcome many collective challenges, including environmental destruction and sustainability, most of which are intertemporal at their roots (DeSteno 2018).

For completeness, we want to emphasize the decisions we discuss here hope for deliberative, slow thinking rather than the impulsive, intuitive fast thinking. This distinction has been well discussed by Kahneman (2011) in the context of human decision making.

Download

Copyright Disclaimer:
This site does not store any files on its server. We only index and link to content provided by other sites. Please contact the content providers to delete copyright contents if any and email us, we'll remove relevant links or contents immediately.