Can taking the perspective of an expert debias human decisions? The case of risky and delayed gains

Abstract

In several previously reported studies, participants increased their normative correctness after being instructed to think hypothetically, specifically taking the perspective of an expert or researcher (Beatty and Thompson, 2012; Morsanyi and Handley, 2012). The goal of this paper was to investigate how this manipulation affects risky or delayed payoffs. In two studies, participants (n = 193) were tested online (in exchange for money) using the adjusting procedure. Individuals produced certain/immediate equivalents for risky/delayed gains. Participants in the control group were solving the problem from their own perspective, while participants in the experimental group were asked to imagine “what would a reliable and honest advisor advise them to do.” Study 1 showed that when taking the perspective of an expert, participants in experimental group became more risk aversive compared to participants in the control group. Additionally, their certain equivalents diverged from the expected value to a greater extent. The results obtained from the experimental group in Study 2 suggest that participants became less impulsive, which means they tried to inhibit their preferences. This favors the explanation, which suggests that the perspective shift forced individuals to override their intuitions with the social norms. Individuals expect to be blamed for impatience or risk taking thus expected an expert to advise them to be more patient and risk aversive.

Overlapping defaults. The case of intertemporal choices

“…The reference points can be imposed externally or have internal origins, and can be made explicitly by instruction, or more subtle, i.e. by priming (Israel, Rosenboim, & Shavit, 2014), perspective taking (Bialek & Sawicki, 2014;Białaszek, Bakun, McGoun, & Zielonka, 2016) or slight changes to the experimental procedure (Sawicki & Białek, 2016).…”

Związek wysiłku fizycznego z odraczaniem wypłat finansowych

“…instrukcję. Ludzie wykazują mniejszą impulsywność, gdy pytani są o wyobrażenie sobie, co na ich miejscu zrobiłby ekspert (Białek, Sawicki, 2014), natomiast więk-szą, gdy wyobrażają sobie, jak postapiłby na ich miejscu laik (Białaszek, Bakun, McGoun, Zielonka, 2016). Ponadto ludzie przywiązują się do (choćby nieumyślnie) narzuconego punktu odniesienia.…”

Choice Architecture in Sustainable Consumption Policy

“…Similar importance can be attached to providing information that reminds consumers of long-term objectives at the moment of decision-making. Research conducted by M. Białek and P. Sawicki proves that those respondents that were asked to adopt the perspective of an expert in decision-making situations made less risky and less impulsive decisions [Białek, Sawicki, 2014]. For D. Somon et al [2010], decision points also include purposeful planning of intervals in consumer behaviors in order to rethink certain decision.…”