IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/
MyIDEAS: Login to save this article or follow this journal

How people evaluate defined contribution, annuity-based pension arrangements: A behavioral exploration

  • Duxbury, Darren
  • Summers, Barbara
  • Hudson, Robert
  • Keasey, Kevin

The shift from defined benefit (DB) to defined contribution (DC) private pension arrangements coupled with the widespread reluctance to annuitize retirement savings is causing growing economic concern in developed countries. This study considers the impact of the salient decision point made explicit in DC schemes, but masked in DB schemes; namely, the exchange of accumulated savings at retirement for a future income stream. We investigate issues affecting the evaluation of a potential annuity purchase at an aggregate level (whether the purchase provides value for money), at a disaggregate level (whether the income stream is adequate in meeting expected needs) and in terms of preferred patterns of future income stream. Our results indicate that annuities do not evaluate well on these criteria, but we provide insight for policy makers, product developers and financial advisors into the issues affecting such evaluations, and into the sort of changes that might make annuitization more attractive.

If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.

File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S016748701200133X
Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to look for a different version under "Related research" (further below) or search for a different version of it.

Article provided by Elsevier in its journal Journal of Economic Psychology.

Volume (Year): 34 (2013)
Issue (Month): C ()
Pages: 256-269

as
in new window

Handle: RePEc:eee:joepsy:v:34:y:2013:i:c:p:256-269
Contact details of provider: Web page: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/joep

References listed on IDEAS
Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:

as in new window
  1. Alicia H. Munnell & Annika Sunden & Mauricio Soto & Catherine Taylor, 2002. "How Will The Rise In 401(K) Plans Affect Bequests?," Issues in Brief ib-10, Center for Retirement Research.
  2. Daniel S. Hamermesh, 1982. "Expectations, Life Expectancy, and Economic Behavior," NBER Working Papers 0835, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
  3. Jeffrey R. Brown & Jeffrey R. Kling & Sendhil Mullainathan & Marian V. Wrobel, 2008. "Why Don't People Insure Late Life Consumption: A Framing Explanation of the Under-Annuitization Puzzle," NBER Working Papers 13748, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
  4. Amy Finkelstein & James Poterba, 2002. "Selection Effects in the United Kingdom Individual Annuities Market," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 112(476), pages 28-50, January.
  5. Michael D. Hurd & Kathleen McGarry, 1997. "The Predictive Validity of Subjective Probabilities of Survival," NBER Working Papers 6193, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
  6. Saul Pleeter & John T. Warner, 2001. "The Personal Discount Rate: Evidence from Military Downsizing Programs," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 91(1), pages 33-53, March.
  7. Matsumoto, Dawn & Peecher, Mark E. & Rich, Jay S., 2000. "Evaluations of Outcome Sequences," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 83(2), pages 331-352, November.
  8. Chapman, Gretchen B., 1996. "Expectations and Preferences for Sequences of Health and Money," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 67(1), pages 59-75, July.
  9. Robert Watson, 2008. "A review of the risks, costs and benefits of defined contribution and defined benefit pension schemes," Journal of Financial Regulation and Compliance, Emerald Group Publishing, vol. 16(3), pages 230-238, July.
  10. Read, Daniel & Loewenstein, George & Rabin, Matthew, 1999. "Choice Bracketing," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 19(1-3), pages 171-97, December.
  11. Zeelenberg, M., 1999. "Anticipated regret, expected feedback and behavioral decision-making," Other publications TiSEM 38371d1b-31fd-45b0-860f-b, Tilburg University, School of Economics and Management.
  12. Gary Gigliotti & Barry Sopher, 1996. "Violations of Present-value Maximization in Income Choice," Departmental Working Papers 199624, Rutgers University, Department of Economics.
  13. Shlomo Benartzi & Alessandro Previtero & Richard H. Thaler, 2011. "Annuitization Puzzles," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 25(4), pages 143-64, Fall.
  14. Kingston, Geoffrey & Thorp, Susan, 2005. "Annuitization and asset allocation with HARA utility," Journal of Pension Economics and Finance, Cambridge University Press, vol. 4(03), pages 225-248, November.
  15. Amy Finkelstein & James Poterba, 2004. "Adverse Selection in Insurance Markets: Policyholder Evidence from the U.K. Annuity Market," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 112(1), pages 183-208, February.
  16. Amos Tversky & Daniel Kahneman, 1979. "Prospect Theory: An Analysis of Decision under Risk," Levine's Working Paper Archive 7656, David K. Levine.
  17. Summers, Barbara & Duxbury, Darren, 2012. "Decision-dependent emotions and behavioral anomalies," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 118(2), pages 226-238.
  18. Thomas Davidoff & Jeffrey R. Brown & Peter A. Diamond, 2005. "Annuities and Individual Welfare," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 95(5), pages 1573-1590, December.
  19. Barsky, Robert B, et al, 1997. "Preference Parameters and Behavioral Heterogeneity: An Experimental Approach in the Health and Retirement Study," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, MIT Press, vol. 112(2), pages 537-79, May.
  20. Guyse, Jeffery L. & Keller, L. Robin & Eppel, Thomas, 2002. "Valuing Environmental Outcomes: Preferences for Constant or Improving Sequences," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 87(2), pages 253-277, March.
  21. Gourville, John T, 1998. " Pennies-a-Day: The Effect of Temporal Reframing on Transaction Evaluation," Journal of Consumer Research, University of Chicago Press, vol. 24(4), pages 395-408, March.
  22. Lowenstein, George & Prelec, Drazen, 1991. "Negative Time Preference," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 81(2), pages 347-52, May.
  23. Hoelzl, Erik & Kamleitner, Bernadette & Kirchler, Erich, 2011. "Loan repayment plans as sequences of instalments," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 32(4), pages 621-631, August.
  24. Ranyard, Rob & Craig, Gill, 1995. "Evaluating and budgeting with instalment credit: An interview study," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 16(3), pages 449-467, September.
  25. Schmitt, David R. & Kemper, Theodore D., 1996. "Preference for Different Sequences of Increasing or Decreasing Rewards," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 66(1), pages 89-101, April.
  26. Ranyard, Rob & Missier, Fabio Del & Bonini, Nicolao & Duxbury, Darren & Summers, Barbara, 2008. "Perceptions and expectations of price changes and inflation: A review and conceptual framework," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 29(4), pages 378-400, August.
  27. Martin Browning & Thomas F. Crossley, 2001. "The Life-Cycle Model of Consumption and Saving," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 15(3), pages 3-22, Summer.
  28. Canova, Luigina & Rattazzi, Anna Maria Manganelli & Webley, Paul, 2005. "The hierarchical structure of saving motives," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 26(1), pages 21-34, February.
Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

This item is not listed on Wikipedia, on a reading list or among the top items on IDEAS.

When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:joepsy:v:34:y:2013:i:c:p:256-269. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Zhang, Lei)

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 references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.

If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link 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 profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

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

This information is provided to you by IDEAS at the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis using RePEc data.