EconStor >
Forschungsinstitut zur Zukunft der Arbeit (IZA), Bonn >
IZA Discussion Papers, Forschungsinstitut zur Zukunft der Arbeit (IZA) >

Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item:

Full metadata record

DC FieldValueLanguage
dc.contributor.authorBurks, Stephen V.en_US
dc.contributor.authorCarpenter, Jeffrey P.en_US
dc.contributor.authorGoette, Lorenzen_US
dc.contributor.authorRustichini, Aldoen_US
dc.description.abstractEconomists and psychologists have devised numerous instruments to measure time preferences and have generated a rich literature examining the extent to which time preferences predict important outcomes; however, we still do not know which measures work best. With the help of a large sample of non-student participants (truck driver trainees) and administrative data on outcomes, we gather four different time preference measures and test the extent to which they predict both on their own and when they are all forced to compete head-to-head. Our results suggest that the now familiar (β, δ) formulation of present bias and exponential discounting predicts best, especially when both parameters are used.en_US
dc.publisherInstitute for the Study of Labor (IZA) Bonnen_US
dc.relation.ispartofseriesDiscussion paper series // Forschungsinstitut zur Zukunft der Arbeit 5808en_US
dc.subject.keywordtime preferenceen_US
dc.subject.keywordpresent biasen_US
dc.subject.keywordfield experimenten_US
dc.titleWhich measures of time preference best predict outcomes? Evidence from a large-scale field experimenten_US
dc.typeWorking Paperen_US
Appears in Collections:IZA Discussion Papers, Forschungsinstitut zur Zukunft der Arbeit (IZA)

Files in This Item:
File Description SizeFormat
66955085X.pdf227.39 kBAdobe PDF
No. of Downloads: Counter Stats
Show simple item record
Download bibliographical data as: BibTeX

Items in EconStor are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.