IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jjrfmx/v18y2025i8p407-d1706905.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Economic Attitudes and Financial Decisions Among Welfare Recipients: Considerations for Workforce Policy

Author

Listed:
  • Jorge N. Zumaeta

    (Department of Finance, College of Business, Florida International University, Miami, FL 33199, USA)

Abstract

This study investigates economic decision-making behaviors among welfare recipients in Miami, Florida, by leveraging well-established experimental protocols: the Guessing Game, the Prudence Measurement Task, the Risk Aversion Task, and the Stag Hunt Game. For this purpose, our study defines financial decisions as the underlying individual preferences that serve as validated proxies for savings behavior, debt management, job-search intensity, and participation in cooperative finance. A central objective is to compare the behavior of welfare recipients to that of undergraduate students, a cohort typically used in experimental economics research. The analysis reveals significant differences between the two groups in strategic thinking and coordination, particularly across ethnic and gender lines. Non-Hispanic/Latino participants in Miami displayed significantly higher average guesses in the Guessing Game compared to their counterparts in Tucson, indicating potential discrepancies in the depth of strategic reasoning. Additionally, female participants in Tucson exhibited higher levels of coordination in the Stag Hunt Game compared to females in Miami, suggesting variance in cooperative behavior between these groups. Despite these findings, regression models demonstrate that location, gender, and ethnicity collectively account for only a small fraction of the observed variance, as evidenced by low R 2 values and substantial mean squared errors across all games. These results suggest that individual heterogeneity, rather than broad demographic variables, may be more influential in shaping economic decisions. This study underscores the complexity of generalizing findings from traditional student samples to more diverse populations, highlighting the need for further investigation into the socioeconomic factors that drive financial decision-making.

Suggested Citation

  • Jorge N. Zumaeta, 2025. "Economic Attitudes and Financial Decisions Among Welfare Recipients: Considerations for Workforce Policy," JRFM, MDPI, vol. 18(8), pages 1-20, July.
  • Handle: RePEc:gam:jjrfmx:v:18:y:2025:i:8:p:407-:d:1706905
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1911-8074/18/8/407/pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1911-8074/18/8/407/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Sebastian Ebert & Daniel Wiesen, 2011. "Testing for Prudence and Skewness Seeking," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 57(7), pages 1334-1349, July.
    2. Maoliang Ye & Jie Zheng & Plamen Nikolov & Sam Asher, 2020. "One Step at a Time: Does Gradualism Build Coordination?," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 66(1), pages 113-129, January.
    3. List John A., 2007. "Field Experiments: A Bridge between Lab and Naturally Occurring Data," The B.E. Journal of Economic Analysis & Policy, De Gruyter, vol. 6(2), pages 1-47, April.
    4. Nagel, Rosemarie, 1995. "Unraveling in Guessing Games: An Experimental Study," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 85(5), pages 1313-1326, December.
    5. Ihil S. Baron, 2020. "The Role of Psychological Testing As an Effort to Improve Employee Competency," GATR Journals jmmr235, Global Academy of Training and Research (GATR) Enterprise.
    6. Pietro Guarnieri & Tommaso Luzzati & Stefano Marchetti, 2019. "An experiment on coordination in a modified stag hunt game," Discussion Papers 2019/246, Dipartimento di Economia e Management (DEM), University of Pisa, Pisa, Italy.
    7. Frechette, Guillaume R. & Schotter, Andrew (ed.), 2015. "Handbook of Experimental Economic Methodology," OUP Catalogue, Oxford University Press, number 9780195328325.
    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. Charness, Gary & Gneezy, Uri & Kuhn, Michael A., 2013. "Experimental methods: Extra-laboratory experiments-extending the reach of experimental economics," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 91(C), pages 93-100.
    2. Omar Al-Ubaydli & John List, 2016. "Field Experiments in Markets," Artefactual Field Experiments j0002, The Field Experiments Website.
    3. Bayona, Anna & Brandts, Jordi & Vives, Xavier, 2020. "Information frictions and market power: A laboratory study," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 122(C), pages 354-369.
    4. Bao, Te & Corgnet, Brice & Hanaki, Nobuyuki & Okada, Katsuhiko & Riyanto, Yohanes E. & Zhu, Jiahua, 2025. "Financial forecasting in the lab and the field: Qualified professionals vs. smart students," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Finance, Elsevier, vol. 46(C).
    5. Nobuyuki Hanaki & Takahiro Hoshino & Kohei Kubota & Fabrice Murtin & Masao Ogaki & Fumio Ohtake & Naoko Okuyama, 2022. "Comparing data gathered in an online and a laboratory experiment using the Trustlab platform," ISER Discussion Paper 1168r, Institute of Social and Economic Research, The University of Osaka, revised Jun 2022.
    6. Olivier Coibion & Dimitris Georgarakos & Yuriy Gorodnichenko & Maarten van Rooij, 2023. "How Does Consumption Respond to News about Inflation? Field Evidence from a Randomized Control Trial," American Economic Journal: Macroeconomics, American Economic Association, vol. 15(3), pages 109-152, July.
    7. Benito Arruñada & Marco Casari & Francesca Pancotto, 2012. "Are self-regarding subjects more rational?," Economics Working Papers 1306, Department of Economics and Business, Universitat Pompeu Fabra.
    8. Bose, Neha & Sgroi, Daniel, 2019. "The Role of Theory of Mind and “Small Talk” Communication in Strategic Decision-Making," CAGE Online Working Paper Series 409, Competitive Advantage in the Global Economy (CAGE).
    9. R. M. Harstad & R. Selten, 2014. "Bounded-rationality models:tasks to become intellectually competitive," Voprosy Ekonomiki, NP Voprosy Ekonomiki, issue 5.
    10. Hitoshi Matsushima, 2017. "Framing Game Theory," CARF F-Series CARF-F-425, Center for Advanced Research in Finance, Faculty of Economics, The University of Tokyo.
    11. Sergeyev, Dmitriy & Iovino, Luigi, 2018. "Central Bank Balance Sheet Policies Without Rational Expectations," CEPR Discussion Papers 13100, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    12. Camille Cornand & Frank Heinemann, 2015. "Macro-expérimentation autour des fonctions des banques centrales," Revue française d'économie, Presses de Sciences-Po, vol. 0(2), pages 3-47.
    13. repec:cdl:ucsdec:qt96v0t3kq is not listed on IDEAS
    14. Freeman, Richard B. & Pan, Xiaofei & Yang, Xiaolan & Ye, Maoliang, 2025. "Team incentives and lower ability workers: A real-effort experiment," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 233(C).
    15. John A. List, 2024. "Optimally generate policy-based evidence before scaling," Nature, Nature, vol. 626(7999), pages 491-499, February.
    16. Romain Baeriswyl & Camille Cornand, 2014. "Reducing Overreaction To Central Banks' Disclosures: Theory And Experiment," Journal of the European Economic Association, European Economic Association, vol. 12(4), pages 1087-1126, August.
    17. Dieter Balkenborg & Rosemarie Nagel, 2016. "An Experiment on Forward vs. Backward Induction: How Fairness and Level k Reasoning Matter," German Economic Review, Verein für Socialpolitik, vol. 17(3), pages 378-408, August.
    18. Daniel Woods & Mustafa Abdallah & Saurabh Bagchi & Shreyas Sundaram & Timothy Cason, 2022. "Network defense and behavioral biases: an experimental study," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 25(1), pages 254-286, February.
    19. Strzalecki, Tomasz, 2014. "Depth of reasoning and higher order beliefs," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 108(C), pages 108-122.
    20. Colin F. Camerer, 1997. "Progress in Behavioral Game Theory," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 11(4), pages 167-188, Fall.
    21. Quement, Mark T. Le & Marcin, Isabel, 2020. "Communication and voting in heterogeneous committees: An experimental study," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 174(C), pages 449-468.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;

    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:gam:jjrfmx:v:18:y:2025:i:8:p:407-:d:1706905. 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: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    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.