IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/jeborg/v81y2012i2p524-533.html

Decision-making strategies and performance among seniors

Author

Listed:
  • Besedeš, Tibor
  • Deck, Cary
  • Sarangi, Sudipta
  • Shor, Mikhael

Abstract

Using paper and pencil experiments administered in senior centers, we examine decision-making performance in multi-attribute decision problems. We differentiate the effects of declining cognitive performance and changing cognitive process on decision-making performance of seniors as they age. We find a significant decline in performance with age due to reduced reliance on common heuristics and increased decision-making randomness among our oldest subjects. However, we find that increasing the number of options in a decision problem increases the number of heuristics brought to the task. This challenges the choice overload view that people give up when confronted with too much choice.

Suggested Citation

  • Besedeš, Tibor & Deck, Cary & Sarangi, Sudipta & Shor, Mikhael, 2012. "Decision-making strategies and performance among seniors," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 81(2), pages 524-533.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:jeborg:v:81:y:2012:i:2:p:524-533
    DOI: 10.1016/j.jebo.2011.07.016
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0167268111001910
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.jebo.2011.07.016?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 look for a different version below or

    for a different version of it.

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Keeney,Ralph L. & Raiffa,Howard, 1993. "Decisions with Multiple Objectives," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521438834, Enero-Abr.
    2. Shane Frederick, 2005. "Cognitive Reflection and Decision Making," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 19(4), pages 25-42, Fall.
    3. Tibor Besedeš & Cary Deck & Sudipta Sarangi & Mikhael Shor, 2012. "Age Effects and Heuristics in Decision Making," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 94(2), pages 580-595, May.
    4. Thomas Dohmen & Armin Falk & David Huffman & Uwe Sunde & Jürgen Schupp & Gert G. Wagner, 2011. "Individual Risk Attitudes: Measurement, Determinants, And Behavioral Consequences," Journal of the European Economic Association, European Economic Association, vol. 9(3), pages 522-550, June.
    5. Cole, Catherine A & Balasubramanian, Siva K, 1993. "Age Differences in Consumers' Search for Information: Public Policy Implications," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 20(1), pages 157-169, June.
    6. Arne Risa Hole, 2006. "Small-sample properties of tests for heteroscedasticity in the conditional logit model," Economics Bulletin, AccessEcon, vol. 3(18), pages 1-14.
    7. Schram, Arthur & Sonnemans, Joep, 2011. "How individuals choose health insurance: An experimental analysis," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 55(6), pages 799-819, August.
    8. Betty E. Tanius & Stacey Wood & Yaniv Hanoch & Thomas Rice, 2009. "Aging and choice: Applications to Medicare Part D," Judgment and Decision Making, Society for Judgment and Decision Making, vol. 4(1), pages 92-101, February.
    9. W. Kip Viscusi & Joni Hersch, 2001. "Cigarette Smokers As Job Risk Takers," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 83(2), pages 269-280, May.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Besedes, Tibor & Deck, Cary & Sarangi, Sudipta & Shor, Mikhael, 2012. "Designing a sequential choice architecture to reduce choice overload," MPRA Paper 38173, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    2. Armin Falk & Anke Becker & Thomas Dohmen & Benjamin Enke & David Huffman & Uwe Sunde, 2018. "Global Evidence on Economic Preferences," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 133(4), pages 1645-1692.
    3. Deck, Cary & Jahedi, Salar, 2015. "The effect of cognitive load on economic decision making: A survey and new experiments," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 78(C), pages 97-119.
    4. Kairies-Schwarz, Nadja & Kokot, Johanna & Vomhof, Markus & Weßling, Jens, 2017. "Health insurance choice and risk preferences under cumulative prospect theory – an experiment," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 137(C), pages 374-397.
    5. Dato, Simon & Grunewald, Andreas & Kräkel, Matthias & Müller, Daniel, 2016. "Asymmetric employer information, promotions, and the wage policy of firms," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 100(C), pages 273-300.
    6. Samek, Anya & Hur, Inkyoung & Kim, Sung-Hee & Yi, Ji Soo, 2016. "An experimental study of the decision process with interactive technology," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 130(C), pages 20-32.
    7. Cheng, Lingguo & Lu, Yunfeng, 2024. "Risk attitudes across the life course: Evidence from China," China Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 88(C).
    8. Sébastien Foudi, 2024. "Are risk attitude, impatience, and impulsivity related to the individual discount rate? Evidence from energy-efficient durable goods," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 96(4), pages 627-661, June.
    9. Mechtenberg, Lydia & Muehlheusser, Gerd & Roider, Andreas, 2020. "Whistleblower protection: Theory and experimental evidence," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 126(C).
    10. Nicolas Bonneton & Christopher Sandmann, 2023. "Non-Stationary Search and Assortative Matching," CRC TR 224 Discussion Paper Series crctr224_2023_465v2, University of Bonn and University of Mannheim, Germany, revised Feb 2025.
    11. Mathieu Chevrier & Vincent Teixeira, 2024. "Algorithm Delegation and Responsibility: Shifting Blame to the Programmer?," GREDEG Working Papers 2024-04, Groupe de REcherche en Droit, Economie, Gestion (GREDEG CNRS), Université Côte d'Azur, France, revised Sep 2024.
    12. Nicolas Bonneton & Christopher Sandmann, 2025. "Non‐Stationary Search and Assortative Matching," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 93(5), pages 1635-1662, September.
    13. Assenza, Tiziana, 2021. "The Ability to 'Distill the Truth'," TSE Working Papers 21-1280, Toulouse School of Economics (TSE), revised Mar 2022.
    14. Non, Arjan & Tempelaar, Dirk, 2016. "Time preferences, study effort, and academic performance," Economics of Education Review, Elsevier, vol. 54(C), pages 36-61.
    15. Johannes Abeler & Daniele Nosenzo, 2015. "Self-selection into laboratory experiments: pro-social motives versus monetary incentives," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 18(2), pages 195-214, June.
    16. Sebastian Bachler & Felix Holzmeister & Michael Razen & Matthias Stefan, 2021. "The Impact of Presentation Format and Choice Architecture on Portfolio Allocations: Experimental Evidence," Working Papers 2021-15, Faculty of Economics and Statistics, Universität Innsbruck.
    17. Backes-Gellner, Uschi & Herz, Holger & Kosfeld, Michael & Oswald, Yvonne, 2021. "Do preferences and biases predict life outcomes? Evidence from education and labor market entry decisions," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 134(C).
    18. González Chapela, Jorge, 2020. "Patience goes a long way: Evidence from Spain," MPRA Paper 98711, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    19. Ennio Bilancini & Leonardo Boncinelli & Lorenzo Spadoni, 2020. "Motivating Risky Choices Increases Risk Taking," Working Papers CESARE 1/2020, Dipartimento di Economia e Finanza, LUISS Guido Carli.
    20. Martin G Kocher & Konstantin E Lucks & David Schindler, 2019. "Unleashing Animal Spirits: Self-Control and Overpricing in Experimental Asset Markets," The Review of Financial Studies, Society for Financial Studies, vol. 32(6), pages 2149-2178.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;

    JEL classification:

    • C91 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Design of Experiments - - - Laboratory, Individual Behavior
    • D03 - Microeconomics - - General - - - Behavioral Microeconomics: Underlying Principles
    • I18 - Health, Education, and Welfare - - Health - - - Government Policy; Regulation; Public Health

    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:jeborg:v:81:y:2012:i:2:p:524-533. 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/jebo .

    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.