IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/hhs/lunewp/2022_017.html

Time Pressure Preferences

Author

Listed:
  • Buser, Thomas

    (University of Amsterdam)

  • van Veldhuizen, Roel

    (Department of Economics, Lund University)

  • Zhong, Yang

    (University of Amsterdam)

Abstract

Many professional and educational settings require individuals to be willing and able to perform under time pressure. We use a lab experiment to elicit preferences for working under time pressure in an incentivized way by eliciting the minimum additional payment participants require to complete a cognitive task under various levels of time pressure versus completing it without time pressure. We make three main contributions. First, we document that participants are averse to working under time pressure on average. Second, we show that there is substantial heterogeneity in the degree of time pressure aversion across individuals and that these individual preferences can be partially captured by simple survey questions. Third, we include these questions in a survey of bachelor students and show that time pressure preferences correlate with future career plans. Our results indicate that individual differences in time pressure aversion could be an influential factor in determining labor market outcomes.

Suggested Citation

  • Buser, Thomas & van Veldhuizen, Roel & Zhong, Yang, 2022. "Time Pressure Preferences," Working Papers 2022:17, Lund University, Department of Economics.
    • Handle: RePEc:hhs:lunewp:2022_017
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://lucris.lub.lu.se/ws/portalfiles/portal/173627706/WP22_17
    File Function: Full text
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Ben Gillen & Erik Snowberg & Leeat Yariv, 2019. "Experimenting with Measurement Error: Techniques with Applications to the Caltech Cohort Study," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 127(4), pages 1826-1863.
    2. Olga Shurchkov, 2012. "Under Pressure: Gender Differences In Output Quality And Quantity Under Competition And Time Constraints," Journal of the European Economic Association, European Economic Association, vol. 10(5), pages 1189-1213, October.
    3. Uri Gneezy & John A. List & Jeffrey A. Livingston & Xiangdong Qin & Sally Sadoff & Yang Xu, 2019. "Measuring Success in Education: The Role of Effort on the Test Itself," American Economic Review: Insights, American Economic Association, vol. 1(3), pages 291-308, December.
    4. Nagore Iriberri & Pedro Rey-Biel, 2019. "Competitive Pressure Widens the Gender Gap in Performance: Evidence from a Two-stage Competition in Mathematics," The Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 129(620), pages 1863-1893.
    5. Martin G. Kocher & Julius Pahlke & Stefan T. Trautmann, 2013. "Tempus Fugit : Time Pressure in Risky Decisions," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 59(10), pages 2380-2391, October.
    6. Thomas Buser & Muriel Niederle & Hessel Oosterbeek, 2020. "Can competitiveness predict education and labor market outcomes? Evidence from incentivized choice and survey measures," Tinbergen Institute Discussion Papers 20-048/I, Tinbergen Institute.
    7. Fallucchi, Francesco & Nosenzo, Daniele & Reuben, Ernesto, 2020. "Measuring preferences for competition with experimentally-validated survey questions," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 178(C), pages 402-423.
    8. Armin Falk & Anke Becker & Thomas Dohmen & Benjamin Enke & David B. Huffman & Uwe Sunde, 2017. "Global Evidence on Economic Preferences," NBER Working Papers 23943, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    9. Aurélien Baillon & Zhenxing Huang & Asli Selim & Peter P. Wakker, 2018. "Measuring Ambiguity Attitudes for All (Natural) Events," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 86(5), pages 1839-1858, September.
    10. David G. Rand & Joshua D. Greene & Martin A. Nowak, 2012. "Spontaneous giving and calculated greed," Nature, Nature, vol. 489(7416), pages 427-430, September.
    11. 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.
    12. Saqib, Najam U. & Chan, Eugene Y., 2015. "Time pressure reverses risk preferences," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 130(C), pages 58-68.
    13. Ghazala Azmat & Caterina Calsamiglia & Nagore Iriberri, 2016. "Gender Differences In Response To Big Stakes," Journal of the European Economic Association, European Economic Association, vol. 14(6), pages 1372-1400, December.
    14. Gustav Tinghög & David Andersson & Caroline Bonn & Harald Böttiger & Camilla Josephson & Gustaf Lundgren & Daniel Västfjäll & Michael Kirchler & Magnus Johannesson, 2013. "Intuition and cooperation reconsidered," Nature, Nature, vol. 498(7452), pages 1-2, June.
    15. Gilboa, Itzhak & Schmeidler, David, 1989. "Maxmin expected utility with non-unique prior," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 18(2), pages 141-153, April.
    16. Lohse, Tim & Simon, Sven A. & Konrad, Kai A., 2018. "Deception under time pressure: Conscious decision or a problem of awareness?," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 146(C), pages 31-42.
    17. De Paola, Maria & Gioia, Francesca, 2016. "Who performs better under time pressure? Results from a field experiment," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 53(C), pages 37-53.
    18. Xiqian Cai & Yi Lu & Jessica Pan & Songfa Zhong, 2019. "Gender Gap under Pressure: Evidence from China's National College Entrance Examination," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 101(2), pages 249-263, May.
    19. 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.
    20. Haji, Anouar El & Krawczyk, Michał & Sylwestrzak, Marta & Zawojska, Ewa, 2019. "Time pressure and risk taking in auctions: A field experiment," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 78(C), pages 68-79.
    21. Lindner, Florian & Sutter, Matthias, 2013. "Level-k reasoning and time pressure in the 11–20 money request game," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 120(3), pages 542-545.
    22. Uri Gneezy & Muriel Niederle & Aldo Rustichini, 2003. "Performance in Competitive Environments: Gender Differences," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 118(3), pages 1049-1074.
    23. Lang, Frieder R. & John, Dennis & Lüdtke, Oliver & Schupp, Jürgen & Wagner, Gert G., 2011. "Short Assessment of the Big Five: Robust Across Survey Methods Except Telephone Interviewing," EconStor Open Access Articles and Book Chapters, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics, vol. 43(2), pages 548-567.
    24. Sutter, Matthias & Kocher, Martin & Strau[ss], Sabine, 2003. "Bargaining under time pressure in an experimental ultimatum game," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 81(3), pages 341-347, December.
    25. Markus Nagler & Johannes Rincke & Erwin Winkler, 2025. "High-Pressure, High-Paying Jobs?," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 107(6), pages 1471-1484, November.
    26. Recalde, María P. & Riedl, Arno & Vesterlund, Lise, 2018. "Error-prone inference from response time: The case of intuitive generosity in public-good games," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 160(C), pages 132-147.
    27. Evren Ors & Frédéric Palomino & Eloïc Peyrache, 2013. "Performance Gender Gap: Does Competition Matter?," Journal of Labor Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 31(3), pages 443-499.
    28. Armin Falk & Anke Becker & Thomas Dohmen & David Huffman & Uwe Sunde, 2023. "The Preference Survey Module: A Validated Instrument for Measuring Risk, Time, and Social Preferences," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 69(4), pages 1935-1950, April.
    29. Young, Diana L. & Goodie, Adam S. & Hall, Daniel B. & Wu, Eric, 2012. "Decision making under time pressure, modeled in a prospect theory framework," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 118(2), pages 179-188.
    30. Martin G. Kocher & David Schindler & Stefan T. Trautmann & Yilong Xu, 2019. "Risk, time pressure, and selection effects," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 22(1), pages 216-246, March.
    31. Dan Ariely & Uri Gneezy & George Loewenstein & Nina Mazar, 2009. "Large Stakes and Big Mistakes," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 76(2), pages 451-469.
    32. Dilmaghani, Maryam, 2020. "Gender differences in performance under time constraint: Evidence from chess tournaments," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 89(C).
    33. David G. Rand & Alexander Peysakhovich & Gordon T. Kraft-Todd & George E. Newman & Owen Wurzbacher & Martin A. Nowak & Joshua D. Greene, 2014. "Social heuristics shape intuitive cooperation," Nature Communications, Nature, vol. 5(1), pages 1-12, May.
    34. Montolio, Daniel & Taberner, Pere A., 2021. "Gender differences under test pressure and their impact on academic performance: A quasi-experimental design," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 191(C), pages 1065-1090.
    35. 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.
    36. Thomas Buser & Huaiping Yuan, 2023. "Public Speaking Aversion," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 69(5), pages 2746-2760, May.
    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. Markus Nagler & Johannes Rincke & Erwin Winkler, 2025. "High-Pressure, High-Paying Jobs?," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 107(6), pages 1471-1484, November.
    2. Markus Nagler & Johannes Rincke & Erwin Winkler, 2024. "Working from home, commuting, and gender," Journal of Population Economics, Springer;European Society for Population Economics, vol. 37(3), pages 1-23, September.
    3. Michele Bernasconi & Irene Maria Buso & Anna Marenzi & Dino Rizzi, 2025. "Tax Notches in the Lab: Disentangling Real and Evasion Responses," Working Papers 2025: 15, Department of Economics, University of Venice "Ca' Foscari".

    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. Dilmaghani, Maryam, 2020. "Gender differences in performance under time constraint: Evidence from chess tournaments," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 89(C).
    2. Martin G. Kocher & David Schindler & Stefan T. Trautmann & Yilong Xu, 2019. "Risk, time pressure, and selection effects," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 22(1), pages 216-246, March.
    3. Brandts, Jordi & El Baroudi, Sabrine & Huber, Stefanie J. & Rott, Christina, 2021. "Gender differences in private and public goal setting," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 192(C), pages 222-247.
    4. Emin Karagözoglu & Martin G. Kocher, 2015. "Bargaining under Time Pressure," CESifo Working Paper Series 5685, CESifo.
    5. 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.
    6. Anders Poulsen & Axel Sonntag, 2019. "Focality is Intuitive - Experimental Evidence on the Effects of Time Pressure in Coordination Games," Working Paper series, University of East Anglia, Centre for Behavioural and Experimental Social Science (CBESS) 19-01, School of Economics, University of East Anglia, Norwich, UK..
    7. Fallucchi, Francesco & Nosenzo, Daniele & Reuben, Ernesto, 2020. "Measuring preferences for competition with experimentally-validated survey questions," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 178(C), pages 402-423.
    8. Lindner, Florian & Rose, Julia, 2017. "No need for more time: Intertemporal allocation decisions under time pressure," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 60(C), pages 53-70.
    9. Eber, Nicolas & François, Abel & Weill, Laurent, 2021. "Gender, age, and attitude toward competition," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 192(C), pages 668-690.
    10. Muriel Niederle, 2014. "Gender," NBER Working Papers 20788, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    11. Apascaritei, Paula & Radl, Jonas & Swarr, Madeline, 2024. "Material incentives moderate gender differences in cognitive effort among children," EconStor Open Access Articles and Book Chapters, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics, vol. 114, pages 1-20.
    12. De Paola, Maria & Gioia, Francesca & Pupo, Valeria, 2020. "Selection and Incentives under Time Pressure: The Importance of Framing," IZA Discussion Papers 13474, IZA Network @ LISER.
    13. Balafoutas, Loukas & Jaber-Lopez, Tarek, 2018. "Impunity under pressure: On the role of emotions as a commitment device," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 168(C), pages 112-114.
    14. Niu, Xiaofei & Li, Jianbiao, 2019. "How Time Constraint Affects the Disposition Effect?," EconStor Preprints 194618, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics.
    15. Joaquina Couto & Leendert van Maanen & Maël Lebreton, 2020. "Investigating the origin and consequences of endogenous default options in repeated economic choices," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 15(8), pages 1-19, August.
    16. Booth, Alison & Lee, Jungmin, 2021. "Girls’ and boys’ performance in competitions: What we can learn from a Korean quiz show," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 187(C), pages 431-447.
    17. Katarzyna Gawryluk & Michal Krawczyk, 2019. "Additional deliberation reduces pessimism: evidence from the double-response method," Journal of the Economic Science Association, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 5(1), pages 51-64, August.
    18. Recalde, María P. & Riedl, Arno & Vesterlund, Lise, 2018. "Error-prone inference from response time: The case of intuitive generosity in public-good games," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 160(C), pages 132-147.
    19. Buckert, Magdalena & Oechssler, Jörg & Schwieren, Christiane, 2017. "Imitation under stress," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 139(C), pages 252-266.
    20. Almås, Ingvild & Berge, Lars Ivar & Bjorvatn, Kjetil & Somville, Vincent & Tungodden, Bertil, 2020. "Adverse selection into competition: Evidence from a large-scale field experiment in Tanzania," Discussion Paper Series in Economics 19/2020, Norwegian School of Economics, Department of Economics.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;

    JEL classification:

    • C90 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Design of Experiments - - - General
    • D91 - Microeconomics - - Micro-Based Behavioral Economics - - - Role and Effects of Psychological, Emotional, Social, and Cognitive Factors on Decision Making
    • J22 - Labor and Demographic Economics - - Demand and Supply of Labor - - - Time Allocation and Labor Supply

    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:hhs:lunewp:2022_017. 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: Iker Arregui Alegria (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/delunse.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.