Strategic self-ignorance

Thunström, Linda; Nordström, Jonas; Shogren, Jason F.; Ehmke, Mariah D.; Veld, Klaas van't

doi:10.1007/s11166-016-9236-9

Cited by 63 publications

(54 citation statements)

References 53 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Similarly, a two-tailed t-test comparing the two groups' average calorie consumption levels -544 for treatment informed beef lovers versus 458 for control informed onesfails to rejects the null of equal means (p = 0.143). 9 These results provide support for the prevalence of strategic ignorance, confirming the previous findings of Thunström et al (2016), Woolley and Risen (2018) and Thunström (2019).…”

Section: Evidence Of Ignorance Being Strategicsupporting

confidence: 82%

“…Consistent with this idea, in an experiment involving actual consumption of ready meals, Thunström et al (2016) find that 58% of subjects choose not to learn the calorie content of their preferred meal. Subsequently, these subjects (who in the experiment stay uninformed) consume significantly more calories than either subjects who choose to become informed or subjects who are given the information exogenously.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 77%

“…Our experimental design builds on that in Thunström et al (2016). The experiment uses ready meals as the risky good.…”

Section: Experimental Designmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…However, the share of control informed subjects who claimed they would have chosen ignorance (10/53; i.e., 19%) is substantially lower than that of treatment subjects who actually chose ignorance (44/96; i.e., 46%). We therefore perform an additional analysis, using the same approach as Thunström et al (2016). We focus thereby on 'beef lovers'subjects who initially, in…”

Section: Evidence Of Ignorance Being Strategicmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Strategic ignorance of health risk: its causes and policy consequences

Nordström

Thunström

Veld

et al. 2020

Behav. Public Policy

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

We examine the causes and policy implications of strategic (willful) ignorance of risk as an excuse to over-engage in risky health behavior. In an experiment on Copenhagen adults, we allow subjects to choose whether to learn the calorie content of a meal before consuming it and then measure their subsequent calorie intake. Consistent with previous studies, we find strong evidence of strategic ignorance: 46% of subjects choose to ignore calorie information, and these subjects subsequently consume more calories on average than they would have had they been informed. While previous studies have focused on self-control as the motivating factor for strategic ignorance of calorie information, we find that ignorance in our study is instead motivated by optimal expectations – subjects choose ignorance so that they can downplay the probability of their preferred meal being high-calorie. We discuss how the motivation matters to policy. Further, we find that the prevalence of strategic ignorance largely negates the effects of calorie information provision: on average, subjects who have the option to ignore calorie information consume the same number of calories as subjects who are provided no information.

show abstract

Section: Evidence Of Ignorance Being Strategicsupporting

confidence: 82%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 77%

“…Our experimental design builds on that in Thunström et al (2016). The experiment uses ready meals as the risky good.…”

Section: Experimental Designmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Evidence Of Ignorance Being Strategicmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Strategic ignorance of health risk: its causes and policy consequences

Nordström

Thunström

Veld

et al. 2020

Behav. Public Policy

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Even if the information is costless to acquire, many respondents would prefer to not receive this information. His survey results are consistent with the finding by Thunström et al (2016) that many people would prefer to not know the calorie content of their foods. Sunstein designates the welfare loss from information in the case of popcorn eaters who do not want to know the calorie content of their favorite snack as a Bhedonic tax.^A particularly striking result was the widespread nature of the public's negative attitudes toward information.…”

Section: Sunstein: the Welfare Effects Of Informationsupporting

confidence: 87%

Risk guideposts for a safer society: Introduction and overview

Viscusi

2019

J Risk Uncertain

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This symposium issue of the Journal of Risk and Uncertainty addresses wide-ranging policy issues pertaining to risk regulation and the economic underpinnings of these efforts. One such intervention consists of policies to address informational market failures. Whether new information has a positive value is less obvious than economists often assume. When more stringent regulations are required, the structure and evaluation of these efforts often hinges on the value of a statistical life, or the VSL. This symposium reports estimates of the utility functions that generate these local risk-money tradeoffs as well as new estimates of the VSL using both stated-preference and revealed-preference approaches. Articles also explore the behavioral factors that affect VSL estimates, the effect of health risks on product prices, and how income taxation affects statedpreference survey elicitations of the VSL. The symposium reports estimates of the VSL for almost 200 countries as well as the VSL levels used by U.S. government agencies in analyses of over 100 government regulations from 1985 to 2018.

show abstract

The emerging science of content labeling: Contextualizing social media content moderation

Morrow

Swire‐Thompson

Polny

et al. 2022

Asso for Info Science & Tech

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In the online information ecosystem, a content label is an attachment to a piece of content intended to contextualize that content for the viewer. Content labels are information about information, such as fact‐checks or sensitive content warnings. Research into content labeling is nascent, but growing; researchers have made strides toward understanding labeling best practices to deal with issues such as disinformation, and misleading content that may affect everything from voting to health. To make this review tractable, we focus on compiling the literature that can contextualize labeling effects and consequences. This review summarizes the central labeling literature, highlights gaps for future research, discusses considerations for social media, and explores definitions toward a taxonomy. Specifically, this article discusses the particulars of content labels, their presentation, and the effects of various labels. The current literature can guide the usage of labels on social media platforms and inform public debate over platform moderation.

show abstract

Strategic self-ignorance

Cited by 63 publications

References 53 publications

Strategic ignorance of health risk: its causes and policy consequences

Strategic ignorance of health risk: its causes and policy consequences

Risk guideposts for a safer society: Introduction and overview

The emerging science of content labeling: Contextualizing social media content moderation

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About