= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
Matt_Simpson comments on Experiment Idea Thread - Spring 2011 - Less Wrong
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
= 783df68a0f980790206b9ea87794c5b6)
Loading…= b715d02e85f7b3b4ae65ca3d3e450868)
Subscribe to RSS Feed
Powered by Reddit
= f037147d6e6c911a85753b9abdedda8d)
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
Comments (53)
1) I'm surprised this hasn't already been done. Many economists like to argue that "people are rational when it counts" i.e. when there's stronger incentives. Similar to your proposal, I'm interested in seeing how priming affects decisions with incentives, and to my knowledge, this hasn't been done either (but IIRC it has been done without incentives).
2) IIRC the results have been replicated with economics and/or psychology graduate students (citation needed).
1) Different but related; people who trade stuff a lot suffer much less from the endowment effect, also while people are crap at randomising normally with money at stake they get better very quickly.
It is possible that 1) has been done but if so I haven't seen the studies.