IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/zbw/ifsowp/325831.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Keeping up by working more: Evidence from a survey experiment on status-driven labor supply

Author

Listed:
  • Obst, Daniel

Abstract

Many employees work more than they would prefer. This paper examines whether social comparisons contribute to this mismatch by inducing individuals to prioritize income over leisure. I use a within-subject survey experiment with university students in which participants repeatedly choose between higher income and reduced working hours under two conditions: one where their choice affects relative income and one where it does not. When upward comparisons are present, the share choosing higher income rises from 36% to 47%, consistent with status concerns driving longer working hours. The design mirrors a prisoner's dilemma: individuals prefer shorter hours but work more to avoid falling behind in income. When the additional income is tied to specific spending categories, the strongest increases in choosing higher income occur for clothing and shoes, food, education, health, and private pension plans-indicating that status concerns extend beyond conspicuous consumption to include long-term investments. Consistent with an established measure of status sensitivity (Solnick & Hemenway, 1998), status-oriented individuals respond more strongly to relative income cues. These findings suggest that labor supply decisions can exhibit positional externalities, with implications for working-time coordination and employee wellbeing

Suggested Citation

  • Obst, Daniel, 2025. "Keeping up by working more: Evidence from a survey experiment on status-driven labor supply," ifso working paper series 53, University of Duisburg-Essen, Institute for Socioeconomics (ifso).
  • Handle: RePEc:zbw:ifsowp:325831
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.econstor.eu/bitstream/10419/325831/1/1936221209.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Hillesheim, Inga & Mechtel, Mario, 2013. "How much do others matter? Explaining positional concerns for different goods and personal characteristics," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 34(C), pages 61-77.
    2. Frank, Robert H. & Levine, Adam Seth & Dijk, Oege, 2014. "Expenditure Cascades," Review of Behavioral Economics, now publishers, vol. 1(1-2), pages 55-73, January.
    3. Alpizar, Francisco & Carlsson, Fredrik & Johansson-Stenman, Olof, 2005. "How much do we care about absolute versus relative income and consumption?," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 56(3), pages 405-421, March.
    4. J. Solnick, Sara & Hemenway, David, 1998. "Is more always better?: A survey on positional concerns," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 37(3), pages 373-383, November.
    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. Goerke, Laszlo & Hillesheim, Inga, 2013. "Relative consumption, working time, and trade unions," Labour Economics, Elsevier, vol. 24(C), pages 170-179.
    2. Akay, Alpaslan & Martinsson, Peter & Tesemma, Tewodros, 2025. "Positional Concerns across Generations," Working Papers in Economics 859, University of Gothenburg, Department of Economics.
    3. Takeo Hori & Masako Ikefuji & Kazuo Mino, 2015. "Conformism And Structural Change," International Economic Review, Department of Economics, University of Pennsylvania and Osaka University Institute of Social and Economic Research Association, vol. 56(3), pages 939-961, August.
    4. Tim Friehe & Mario Mechtel, 2017. "Gambling to leapfrog in status?," Review of Economics of the Household, Springer, vol. 15(4), pages 1291-1319, December.
    5. Leites, Martín & Rivero, Analía & Salas, Gonzalo, 2024. "The positionality of goods and the positional concern’s origin," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 109(C).
    6. Pascal Courty & Merwan Engineer, 2019. "A pure hedonic theory of utility and status: Unhappy but efficient invidious comparisons," Journal of Public Economic Theory, Association for Public Economic Theory, vol. 21(4), pages 601-621, August.
    7. Mara Grasseni & Federica Origo, 2018. "Competing for Happiness: Attitudes to Competition, Positional Concerns and Wellbeing," Journal of Happiness Studies, Springer, vol. 19(7), pages 1981-2008, October.
    8. Friehe, Tim & Mechtel, Mario, 2014. "Conspicuous consumption and political regimes: Evidence from East and West Germany," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 67(C), pages 62-81.
    9. Murat Birdal & T. Ongan, 2016. "Why Do We Care About Having More than Others? Socioeconomic Determinants of Positional Concerns in Different Domains," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 126(2), pages 727-738, March.
    10. Sergio Da Silva & Raul Matsushita & Vanessa Valcanover & Jessica Campara & Newton Da Costa, 2022. "Losses make choices nonpositional," SN Business & Economics, Springer, vol. 2(11), pages 1-11, November.
    11. Bogaerts, Tess & Pandelaere, Mario, 2013. "Less is more: Why some domains are more positional than others," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 39(C), pages 225-236.
    12. Behringer, Jan & Endres, Lukas & van Treeck, Till, 2024. "Revisiting positional choice: Survey evidence from Germany," ifso working paper series 33, University of Duisburg-Essen, Institute for Socioeconomics (ifso).
    13. Mageli, Ingvild & Mannberg, Andrea & Heen, Eirik Eriksen, 2022. "With whom, and about what, do we compete for social status? Effects of social closeness and relevance of reference groups for positional concerns," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 98(C).
    14. Tim Friehe & Mario Mechtel, 2017. "Gambling to leapfrog in status?," Review of Economics of the Household, Springer, vol. 15(4), pages 1291-1319, December.
    15. Francisco Alvarez-Cuadrado & Ngo Van Long, 2012. "Envy and Inequality," Scandinavian Journal of Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 114(3), pages 949-973, September.
    16. Anderson, Cameron & Hildreth , John Angus D., 2016. "Striving for superiority: The human desire for status," Institute for Research on Labor and Employment, Working Paper Series qt5pn0f0jm, Institute of Industrial Relations, UC Berkeley.
    17. Goerke, Laszlo, 2013. "Relative consumption and tax evasion," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 87(C), pages 52-65.
    18. Tim Friehe & Mario Mechtel, 2014. "Statuskonsum in Ost- und Westdeutschland: Beeinflusst durch das politische Regime?," ifo Dresden berichtet, ifo Institute - Leibniz Institute for Economic Research at the University of Munich, vol. 21(03), pages 31-36, June.
    19. Akay, Alpaslan & Martinsson, Peter, 2011. "Does relative income matter for the very poor? Evidence from rural Ethiopia," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 110(3), pages 213-215, March.
    20. Alpaslan Akay & Gökhan Karabulut & Peter Martinsson, 2013. "The effect of religiosity and religious festivals on positional concerns -- an experimental investigation of Ramadan," Applied Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 45(27), pages 3914-3921, September.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;

    JEL classification:

    • J22 - Labor and Demographic Economics - - Demand and Supply of Labor - - - Time Allocation and Labor Supply
    • D91 - Microeconomics - - Micro-Based Behavioral Economics - - - Role and Effects of Psychological, Emotional, Social, and Cognitive Factors on Decision Making
    • J31 - Labor and Demographic Economics - - Wages, Compensation, and Labor Costs - - - Wage Level and Structure; Wage Differentials
    • D31 - Microeconomics - - Distribution - - - Personal Income and Wealth Distribution
    • C83 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Data Collection and Data Estimation Methodology; Computer Programs - - - Survey Methods; Sampling Methods
    • C99 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Design of Experiments - - - Other

    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:zbw:ifsowp:325831. 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: ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/isduede.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.