IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/arx/papers/2501.00863.html

Paternalism and Deliberation: An Experiment on Making Formal Rules

Author

Listed:
  • Max R. P. Grossmann

Abstract

Mandatory waiting periods have been instituted for medical procedures, gun purchases, and other high-stakes decisions. Are these softly paternalistic policies substitutes for harder restrictions, and are delayed decisions more respected? In a general population survey experiment, Choice Architects make rules for decision-makers facing a high-stakes Bomb Risk Elicitation Task. Treatments vary when the decision is made: on the spot or after one day, and whether the initial decision can be revised. Choice Architects set a cap on the decision-maker's risk taking; in one treatment, they can additionally implement a mandatory waiting period. Exogenous deliberation has no effect on the cap; equivalence testing (TOST) and Bayesian analysis ($\text{BF}_{01} \approx 12$) provide strong positive evidence for the absence of an effect. Endogenously prescribed waiting periods are add-on restrictions that do not substitute for the cap. Choice Architects believe that, with time, the average decision-maker will take less risk and -- because of the distribution of Choice Architects' bliss points -- come closer to Choice Architects' subjective ideal choice; the resulting reduction in forecasted errors is small. Soft and hard paternalistic instruments are not substitutes: waiting periods are deployed as add-on restrictions.

Suggested Citation

  • Max R. P. Grossmann, 2025. "Paternalism and Deliberation: An Experiment on Making Formal Rules," Papers 2501.00863, arXiv.org, revised May 2026.
  • Handle: RePEc:arx:papers:2501.00863
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://arxiv.org/pdf/2501.00863
    File Function: Latest version
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Lindo, Jason M. & Pineda-Torres, Mayra, 2021. "New Evidence on the Effects of Mandatory Waiting Periods for Abortion," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 80(C).
    2. Lipman, Stefan A., 2024. "One size fits all? Designing financial incentives tailored to individual economic preferences," Behavioural Public Policy, Cambridge University Press, vol. 8(2), pages 264-278, April.
    3. Ramzi Mabsout, 2022. "John Stuart Mill, soft paternalist," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 58(1), pages 161-186, January.
    4. George W. Divine & H. James Norton & Anna E. Barón & Elizabeth Juarez-Colunga, 2018. "The Wilcoxon–Mann–Whitney Procedure Fails as a Test of Medians," The American Statistician, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 72(3), pages 278-286, July.
    5. Paolo Crosetto & Antonio Filippin, 2013. "The “bomb” risk elicitation task," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 47(1), pages 31-65, August.
    6. Samuelson, William & Zeckhauser, Richard, 1988. "Status Quo Bias in Decision Making," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 1(1), pages 7-59, March.
    7. Andrew Caplin & Daniel Martin, 2016. "The Dual-Process Drift Diffusion Model: Evidence From Response Times," Economic Inquiry, Western Economic Association International, vol. 54(2), pages 1274-1282, April.
    8. Manning, Willard G. & Blumberg, Linda & Moulton, Lawrence H., 1995. "The demand for alcohol: The differential response to price," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 14(2), pages 123-148, June.
    9. Hunt Allcott & Daniel Cohen & William Morrison & Dmitry Taubinsky, 2022. "When do "Nudges" Increase Welfare?," NBER Working Papers 30740, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    10. Griffin Edwards & Erik Nesson & Joshua J. Robinson & Fredrick Vars, 2018. "Looking Down the Barrel of a Loaded Gun: The Effect of Mandatory Handgun Purchase Delays on Homicide and Suicide," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 128(616), pages 3117-3140, December.
    11. Kocher, Martin G. & Sutter, Matthias, 2006. "Time is money--Time pressure, incentives, and the quality of decision-making," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 61(3), pages 375-392, November.
    12. Gebhard Kirchgässner, 2017. "Soft paternalism, merit goods, and normative individualism," European Journal of Law and Economics, Springer, vol. 43(1), pages 125-152, February.
    13. Drew Fudenberg & Philipp Strack & Tomasz Strzalecki, 2018. "Speed, Accuracy, and the Optimal Timing of Choices," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 108(12), pages 3651-3684, December.
    14. Kirby Nielsen & John Rehbeck, 2022. "When Choices Are Mistakes," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 112(7), pages 2237-2268, July.
    15. Andrew Caplin, 2016. "Measuring and Modeling Attention," Annual Review of Economics, Annual Reviews, vol. 8(1), pages 379-403, October.
    16. Jörg Oechssler & Andreas Roider & Patrick W. Schmitz, 2015. "Cooling Off in Negotiations: Does it Work?," Journal of Institutional and Theoretical Economics (JITE), Mohr Siebeck, Tübingen, vol. 171(4), pages 565-588, December.
    17. Jungmin Lee, 2013. "The Impact of a Mandatory Cooling-off Period on Divorce," Journal of Law and Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 56(1), pages 227-243.
    18. Roth, Alvin E., 1986. "Laboratory Experimentation in Economics," Economics and Philosophy, Cambridge University Press, vol. 2(2), pages 245-273, October.
    19. Alex Imas & Michael A. Kuhn & Vera Mironova, 2022. "Waiting to Choose: The Role of Deliberation in Intertemporal Choice," American Economic Journal: Microeconomics, American Economic Association, vol. 14(3), pages 414-440, August.
    20. Schnellenbach, Jan, 2012. "Nudges and norms: On the political economy of soft paternalism," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 28(2), pages 266-277.
    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. Leonidas Spiliopoulos & Andreas Ortmann, 2018. "The BCD of response time analysis in experimental economics," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 21(2), pages 383-433, June.
    2. Huseynov, Samir & Krajbich, Ian & Palma, Marco A., "undated". "No Time to Think: Food Decision-Making under Time Pressure," 2018 Annual Meeting, August 5-7, Washington, D.C. 274135, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    3. Clithero, John A., 2018. "Response times in economics: Looking through the lens of sequential sampling models," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 69(C), pages 61-86.
    4. Tobias Gesche, 2022. "Reference‐price shifts and customer antagonism: Evidence from reviews for online auctions," Journal of Economics & Management Strategy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 31(3), pages 558-578, August.
    5. Kirchgässner, Gebhard, 2012. "Sanfter Paternalismus, meritorische Güter, und der normative Individualismus," Economics Working Paper Series 1217, University of St. Gallen, School of Economics and Political Science.
    6. Gesche, Tobias, 2018. "Reference Price Shifts and Customer Antagonism: Evidence from Reviews for Online Auctions," VfS Annual Conference 2018 (Freiburg, Breisgau): Digital Economy 181650, Verein für Socialpolitik / German Economic Association.
    7. Paolo Crosetto & Alexia Gaudeul, 2024. "Fast Then Slow: Choice Revisions Drive a Decline in the Attraction Effect," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 70(6), pages 3711-3733, June.
    8. Aditya Goenka, 2004. "Non-Fungibility and Mental Accounting: A Model of Bounded Rationality with Sunspot," Econometric Society 2004 Australasian Meetings 234, Econometric Society.
    9. Gilles Grolleau & Angela Sutan & Sana El Harbi & Marwa Jedidi, 2018. "Do We Need More Time To Give Less? Experimental Evidence From Tunisia," Bulletin of Economic Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 70(4), pages 400-409, October.
    10. Jan Hausfeld & Sven Resnjanskij, 2017. "Risky Decisions and the Opportunity Costs of Time," TWI Research Paper Series 108, Thurgauer Wirtschaftsinstitut, Universität Konstanz.
    11. Christian König-Kersting & Johannes Lohse & Anna Louisa Merkel, 2020. "Active and Passive Risk-Taking," Working Papers 2020-04, Faculty of Economics and Statistics, Universität Innsbruck.
    12. Xavier Gabaix, 2017. "Behavioral Inattention," NBER Working Papers 24096, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    13. Duffy, Sean & Gussman, Steven & Smith, John, 2021. "Visual judgments of length in the economics laboratory: Are there brains in stochastic choice?," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 93(C).
    14. Ambroise Descamps & Sébastien Massoni & Lionel Page, 2022. "Learning to hesitate," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 25(1), pages 359-383, February.
    15. Pasche, Markus, 2014. "Soft Paternalism and Nudging - Critique of the Behavioral Foundations," MPRA Paper 61140, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    16. Balcombe, Kelvin & Fraser, Iain & Williams, Louis & McSorley, Eugene, 2017. "Examining the relationship between visual attention and stated preferences: A discrete choice experiment using eye-tracking," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 144(C), pages 238-257.
    17. Ennio Bilancini & Leonardo Boncinelli & Luigi Luini, 2017. "Does Focality Depend on the Mode of Cognition? Experimental Evidence on Pure Coordination Games," Department of Economics University of Siena 771, Department of Economics, University of Siena.
    18. Alós-Ferrer, Carlos & Garagnani, Michele, 2022. "The gradual nature of economic errors," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 200(C), pages 55-66.
    19. Andersen, Steffen & Gneezy, Uri & Kajackaite, Agne & Marx, Julie, 2018. "Allowing for reflection time does not change behavior in dictator and cheating games," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 145(C), pages 24-33.
    20. Burlando, Alfredo & Kuhn, Michael A. & Prina, Silvia, 2025. "Too fast, too furious? Digital credit delivery speed and repayment rates," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 174(C).

    More about this item

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    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:arx:papers:2501.00863. 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: arXiv administrators (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://arxiv.org/ .

    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.