IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/inm/ormnsc/v67y2021i1p126-145.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Measuring Information Preferences

Author

Listed:
  • Emily H. Ho

    (Department of Psychology, Fordham University, Bronx, New York 10458; Department of Medical Social Sciences, Northwestern University, Chicago, Illinois 60611;)

  • David Hagmann

    (Harvard Kennedy School, Harvard University, Cambridge, Massachusetts 02138; Department of Social and Decision Sciences, Carnegie Mellon University, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania 15213)

  • George Loewenstein

    (Department of Social and Decision Sciences, Carnegie Mellon University, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania 15213)

Abstract

Advances in medical testing and widespread access to the internet have made it easier than ever to obtain information. Yet, when it comes to some of the most important decisions in life, people often choose to remain ignorant for a variety of psychological and economic reasons. We design and validate an information preferences scale to measure an individual’s desire to obtain or avoid information that may be unpleasant but could improve future decisions. The scale measures information preferences in three domains that are psychologically and materially consequential: consumer finance, personal characteristics, and health. In three studies incorporating responses from over 2,300 individuals, we present tests of the scale’s reliability and validity. We show that the scale predicts a real decision to obtain (or avoid) information in each of the domains as well as decisions from out-of-sample, unrelated domains. Across settings, many respondents prefer to remain in a state of active ignorance even when information is freely available. Moreover, we find that information preferences are a stable trait but that an individual’s preference for information can differ across domains.

Suggested Citation

  • Emily H. Ho & David Hagmann & George Loewenstein, 2021. "Measuring Information Preferences," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 67(1), pages 126-145, January.
    • Handle: RePEc:inm:ormnsc:v:67:y:2021:i:1:p:126-145
    DOI: 10.1287/mnsc.2019.3543
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.2019.3543
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1287/mnsc.2019.3543?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
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Emily Oster & Ira Shoulson & E. Ray Dorsey, 2013. "Optimal Expectations and Limited Medical Testing: Evidence from Huntington Disease," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 103(2), pages 804-830, April.
    2. Uri Gneezy & Jan Potters, 1997. "An Experiment on Risk Taking and Evaluation Periods," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 112(2), pages 631-645.
    3. Daniel Fernandes & John G. Lynch & Richard G. Netemeyer, 2014. "Financial Literacy, Financial Education, and Downstream Financial Behaviors," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 60(8), pages 1861-1883, August.
    4. Stigler, George J., 2011. "Economics of Information," Ekonomicheskaya Politika / Economic Policy, Russian Presidential Academy of National Economy and Public Administration, vol. 5, pages 35-49.
    5. Botond Kőszegi & Matthew Rabin, 2006. "A Model of Reference-Dependent Preferences," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 121(4), pages 1133-1165.
    6. Bazerman, Max H. & Sezer, Ovul, 2016. "Bounded awareness: Implications for ethical decision making," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 136(C), pages 95-105.
    7. Druckman, James N. & Peterson, Erik & Slothuus, Rune, 2013. "How Elite Partisan Polarization Affects Public Opinion Formation," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 107(1), pages 57-79, February.
    8. Caplin, Andrew & Eliaz, Kfir, 2003. "AIDS Policy and Psychology: A Mechanism-Design Approach," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 34(4), pages 631-646, Winter.
    9. David Eil & Justin M. Rao, 2011. "The Good News-Bad News Effect: Asymmetric Processing of Objective Information about Yourself," American Economic Journal: Microeconomics, American Economic Association, vol. 3(2), pages 114-138, May.
    10. 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.
    11. Ananda Ganguly & Joshua Tasoff, 2017. "Fantasy and Dread: The Demand for Information and the Consumption Utility of the Future," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 63(12), pages 4037-4060, December.
    12. Antonovsky, Aaron, 1993. "The structure and properties of the sense of coherence scale," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 36(6), pages 725-733, March.
    13. Ledyard Tucker & Charles Lewis, 1973. "A reliability coefficient for maximum likelihood factor analysis," Psychometrika, Springer;The Psychometric Society, vol. 38(1), pages 1-10, March.
    14. Nicholas J. Schork, 2015. "Personalized medicine: Time for one-person trials," Nature, Nature, vol. 520(7549), pages 609-611, April.
    15. Botond Koszegi & Matthew Rabin, 2009. "Reference-Dependent Consumption Plans," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 99(3), pages 909-936, June.
    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. Fast, Victoria & Sachs, Nikolai & Schnurr, Daniel, 2021. "Privacy Decision-Making in Digital Markets: Eliciting Individuals' Preferences for Transparency," 23rd ITS Biennial Conference, Online Conference / Gothenburg 2021. Digital societies and industrial transformations: Policies, markets, and technologies in a post-Covid world 238020, International Telecommunications Society (ITS).
    2. Russell Golman & George Loewenstein & Andras Molnar & Silvia Saccardo, 2022. "The Demand for, and Avoidance of, Information," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 68(9), pages 6454-6476, September.
    3. Lohmann, Paul M. & Gsottbauer, Elisabeth & Doherty, Anya & Kontoleon, Andreas, 2022. "Do carbon footprint labels promote climatarian diets? Evidence from a large-scale field experiment," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 114(C).
    4. Konstantin Offer & Dorothee Mischkowski & Zoe Rahwan & Christoph Engel, 2024. "Deliberately Ignoring Unfairness: Responses to Uncertain Inequality in the Ultimatum Game," Discussion Paper Series of the Max Planck Institute for Research on Collective Goods 2024_06, Max Planck Institute for Research on Collective Goods.
    5. Rehse, Dominik & Tremöhlen, Felix, 2022. "Fostering participation in digital contact tracing," Information Economics and Policy, Elsevier, vol. 58(C).
    6. Charlotte Cordes & Jana Friedrichsen & Simeon Schudy, 2023. "Motivated Procrastination," Rationality and Competition Discussion Paper Series 471, CRC TRR 190 Rationality and Competition.
    7. Castagnetti, Alessandro & Schmacker, Renke, 2022. "Protecting the ego: Motivated information selection and updating," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 142(C).
    8. Chadi, Adrian & Homolka, Konstantin, 2022. "Little Lies and Blind Eyes – Experimental Evidence on Cheating and Task Performance in Work Groups," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 199(C), pages 122-159.

    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. Edika Quispe-Torreblanca & John Gathergood & George Loewenstein & Neil Stewart, 2020. "Attention Utility: Evidence from Individual Investors," CESifo Working Paper Series 8091, CESifo.
    2. Shimon Kogan & Florian H. Schneider & Roberto A. Weber, 2021. "Self-Serving Biases in Beliefs about Collective Outcomes," CESifo Working Paper Series 8975, CESifo.
    3. Chadi, Adrian & Homolka, Konstantin, 2022. "Little Lies and Blind Eyes – Experimental Evidence on Cheating and Task Performance in Work Groups," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 199(C), pages 122-159.
    4. Nikolaus Schweizer & Nora Szech, 2018. "Optimal Revelation of Life-Changing Information," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 64(11), pages 5250-5262, November.
    5. Hsiaw, Alice, 2018. "Goal bracketing and self-control," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 111(C), pages 100-121.
    6. Schwardmann, Peter, 2019. "Motivated health risk denial and preventative health care investments," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 65(C), pages 78-92.
    7. Elyès Jouini & Clotilde Napp, 2018. "The Impact of Health-Related Emotions on Belief Formation and Behavior," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 84(3), pages 405-427, May.
    8. Rehse, Dominik & Tremöhlen, Felix, 2020. "Fostering participation in digital public health interventions: The case of digital contact tracing," ZEW Discussion Papers 20-076, ZEW - Leibniz Centre for European Economic Research.
    9. Florian Zimmermann, 2015. "Clumped or Piecewise? Evidence on Preferences for Information," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 61(4), pages 740-753, April.
    10. Ananda Ganguly & Joshua Tasoff, 2017. "Fantasy and Dread: The Demand for Information and the Consumption Utility of the Future," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 63(12), pages 4037-4060, December.
    11. Silvia Saccardo & Marta Serra-Garcia, 2020. "Cognitive Flexibility or Moral Commitment? Evidence of Anticipated Belief Distortion," CESifo Working Paper Series 8529, CESifo.
    12. Berber Kramer, 2016. "When expectations become aspirations: reference-dependent preferences and liquidity constraints," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 61(4), pages 685-721, April.
    13. Luc Meunier & Sima Ohadi, 2023. "When are two portfolios better than one? A prospect theory approach," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 94(3), pages 503-538, April.
    14. Rehse, Dominik & Tremöhlen, Felix, 2022. "Fostering participation in digital contact tracing," Information Economics and Policy, Elsevier, vol. 58(C).
    15. Yufeng Li & Juanjuan Meng & Changcheng Song & Kai Zheng, 2021. "Information Avoidance and Medical Screening: A Field Experiment in China," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 67(7), pages 4252-4272, July.
    16. Schünemann, Johannes & Strulik, Holger & Trimborn, Timo, 2023. "Anticipation of deteriorating health and information avoidance," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 89(C).
    17. Fels, Markus, 2015. "On the value of information: Why people reject medical tests," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 56(C), pages 1-12.
    18. Ungureanu, S., 2015. "Inefficient Reallocation, Loss Aversion and Prospect Theory," Working Papers 8124, Department of Economics, City University London.
    19. Lane, Tom, 2022. "Intrinsic preferences for unhappy news," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 202(C), pages 119-130.
    20. Francesco Capozza & Ingar Haaland & Christopher Roth & Johannes Wohlfart, 2021. "Studying Information Acquisition in the Field: A Practical Guide and Review," CEBI working paper series 21-15, University of Copenhagen. Department of Economics. The Center for Economic Behavior and Inequality (CEBI).

    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:inm:ormnsc:v:67:y:2021:i:1:p:126-145. 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: Chris Asher (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/inforea.html .

    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.