IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/ecolet/v180y2019icp33-35.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Asking for frequencies rather than percentages increases the validity of subjective probability measures: Evidence from subjective life expectancy

Author

Listed:
  • Comerford, David A.

Abstract

Survey measures of subjective expectations manifest anomalies in how people report percentages. The current research finds that frequency-based measures deliver more valid subjective probabilities of living to a given age than do questions that elicit a percentage chance.

Suggested Citation

  • Comerford, David A., 2019. "Asking for frequencies rather than percentages increases the validity of subjective probability measures: Evidence from subjective life expectancy," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 180(C), pages 33-35.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:ecolet:v:180:y:2019:i:c:p:33-35
    DOI: 10.1016/j.econlet.2019.04.001
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0165176519301259
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.econlet.2019.04.001?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Wu, Shang & Stevens, Ralph & Thorp, Susan, 2015. "Cohort and target age effects on subjective survival probabilities: Implications for models of the retirement phase," Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control, Elsevier, vol. 55(C), pages 39-56.
    2. John Payne & Namika Sagara & Suzanne Shu & Kirstin Appelt & Eric Johnson, 2013. "Life expectancy as a constructed belief: Evidence of a live-to or die-by framing effect," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 46(1), pages 27-50, February.
    3. Michael D. Hurd, 2009. "Subjective Probabilities in Household Surveys," Annual Review of Economics, Annual Reviews, vol. 1(1), pages 543-564, May.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Gizem Koşar & Cormac O'Dea, 2022. "Expectations Data in Structural Microeconomic Models," NBER Working Papers 30094, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    2. repec:cup:judgdm:v:16:y:2021:i:4:p:1072-1096 is not listed on IDEAS
    3. David A. Comerford, 2021. "Apparent age and gender differences in survival optimism: To what extent are they a bias in the translation of beliefs onto a percentage scale?," Judgment and Decision Making, Society for Judgment and Decision Making, vol. 16(4), pages 1072-1096, July.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Federica Teppa & Susan Thorp & Hazel Bateman, 2015. "Family, friends and framing: A cross-country study of subjective survival expectations," DNB Working Papers 491, Netherlands Central Bank, Research Department.
    2. de Bresser, Jochem, 2016. "Test-Retest Reliability of Subjective Survival Expectations," Other publications TiSEM dfd6074d-31ae-4ecb-be25-6, Tilburg University, School of Economics and Management.
    3. Vesile Kutlu-Koc & Adriaan Kalwij, 2017. "Individual Survival Expectations and Actual Mortality: Evidence from Dutch Survey and Administrative Data," European Journal of Population, Springer;European Association for Population Studies, vol. 33(4), pages 509-532, October.
    4. de Bresser, Jochem, 2019. "Measuring Subjective Survival Expectations : Do Response Scales Matter?," Other publications TiSEM 53bc2ec3-4126-4dfb-81f3-8, Tilburg University, School of Economics and Management.
    5. Chen, An & Hieber, Peter & Rach, Manuel, 2021. "Optimal retirement products under subjective mortality beliefs," Insurance: Mathematics and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 101(PA), pages 55-69.
    6. Bell, D.N.F. & Comerford, D.A. & Douglas, E., 2020. "How do subjective life expectancies compare with mortality tables? Similarities and differences in three national samples," The Journal of the Economics of Ageing, Elsevier, vol. 16(C).
    7. David A. Comerford, 2021. "Apparent age and gender differences in survival optimism: To what extent are they a bias in the translation of beliefs onto a percentage scale?," Judgment and Decision Making, Society for Judgment and Decision Making, vol. 16(4), pages 1072-1096, July.
    8. Michael P. Keane & Susan Thorp, 2016. "Complex Decision Making: The Roles of Cognitive Limitations, Cognitive Decline and Ageing," Economics Papers 2016-W10, Economics Group, Nuffield College, University of Oxford.
    9. Brigitte Dormont & Anne-Laure Samson & Marc Fleurbaey & Stéphane Luchini & Erik Schokkaert, 2018. "Individual Uncertainty About Longevity," Demography, Springer;Population Association of America (PAA), vol. 55(5), pages 1829-1854, October.
    10. Wu, Shang & Stevens, Ralph & Thorp, Susan, 2015. "Cohort and target age effects on subjective survival probabilities: Implications for models of the retirement phase," Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control, Elsevier, vol. 55(C), pages 39-56.
    11. de Bresser, Jochem, 2021. "Evaluating the Accuracy of Counterfactuals The Role of Heterogeneous Expectations in Life Cycle Models," Other publications TiSEM a7e2b4d8-fed0-4e86-926f-d, Tilburg University, School of Economics and Management.
    12. de Bresser, Jochem, 2021. "Evaluating the Accuracy of Counterfactuals The Role of Heterogeneous Expectations in Life Cycle Models," Discussion Paper 2021-034, Tilburg University, Center for Economic Research.
    13. de Bresser, Jochem, 2019. "The Role of Heterogeneous Expectations in Life Cycle Models : Evaluating the Accuracy of Counterfactuals," Other publications TiSEM 25d04a47-1020-47eb-ba94-4, Tilburg University, School of Economics and Management.
    14. repec:cup:judgdm:v:16:y:2021:i:4:p:1072-1096 is not listed on IDEAS
    15. Keane, M.P. & Thorp, S., 2016. "Complex Decision Making," Handbook of the Economics of Population Aging, in: Piggott, John & Woodland, Alan (ed.), Handbook of the Economics of Population Aging, edition 1, volume 1, chapter 0, pages 661-709, Elsevier.
    16. de Bresser, Jochem, 2019. "Measuring subjective survival expectations – Do response scales matter?," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 165(C), pages 136-156.
    17. Groneck, Max & Ludwig, Alexander & Zimper, Alexander, 2016. "A life-cycle model with ambiguous survival beliefs," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 162(C), pages 137-180.
    18. Padmaja Ayyagari & Daifeng He, 2017. "The Role of Medical Expenditure Risk in Portfolio Allocation Decisions," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 26(11), pages 1447-1458, November.
    19. Yokoo, Hide-Fumi & Arimura, Toshi H. & Chattopadhyay, Mriduchhanda & Katayama, Hajime, 2023. "Subjective risk belief function in the field: Evidence from cooking fuel choices and health in India," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 161(C).
    20. Gregorio Gimenez & Ana Isabel Gil-Lacruz & Marta Gil-Lacruz, 2021. "Is Happiness Linked to Subjective Life Expectancy? A Study of Chilean Senior Citizens," Mathematics, MDPI, vol. 9(17), pages 1-12, August.
    21. Pamela Giustinelli & Charles F. Manski, 2018. "Survey Measures Of Family Decision Processes For Econometric Analysis Of Schooling Decisions," Economic Inquiry, Western Economic Association International, vol. 56(1), pages 81-99, January.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Expectations; Subjective probabilities; Survival expectations; Numeracy;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • D15 - Microeconomics - - Household Behavior - - - Intertemporal Household Choice; Life Cycle Models and Saving
    • D84 - Microeconomics - - Information, Knowledge, and Uncertainty - - - Expectations; Speculations
    • D91 - Microeconomics - - Micro-Based Behavioral Economics - - - Role and Effects of Psychological, Emotional, Social, and Cognitive Factors on Decision Making

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:ecolet:v:180:y:2019:i:c:p:33-35. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/ecolet .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.