Knowledge and Freedom: Evidence on the Relationship Between Information and Paternalism

Fuente: arXiv
Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Main Author: Grossmann, Max R. P.
Format: Preprint
Published: 2024
Subjects:
Online Access:
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
_version_ 1866910768207757312
author Grossmann, Max R. P.
author_facet Grossmann, Max R. P.
contents When is autonomy granted to a decision-maker based on their knowledge, and if no autonomy is granted, what form will the intervention take? A parsimonious theoretical framework shows how policymakers can exploit decision-maker mistakes and use them as a justification for intervention. In two experiments, policymakers ("Choice Architects") can intervene in a choice faced by a decision-maker. We vary the amount of knowledge decision-makers possess about the choice. Full decision-maker knowledge causes more than a 60% reduction in intervention rates. Beliefs have a small, robust correlation with interventions on the intensive margin. Choice Architects disproportionately prefer to have decision-makers make informed decisions. Interveners are less likely to provide information. As theory predicts, the same applies to Choice Architects who believe that decision-maker mistakes align with their own preference. When Choice Architects are informed about the decision-maker's preference, this information is used to determine the imposed option. However, Choice Architects employ their own preference to a similar extent. A riskless option is causally more likely to be imposed, being correlated with but conceptually distinct from Choice Architects' own preference. This is a qualification to what has been termed "projective paternalism."
format Preprint
id arxiv_https___arxiv_org_abs_2410_20970
institution arXiv
publishDate 2024
record_format arxiv
spellingShingle Knowledge and Freedom: Evidence on the Relationship Between Information and Paternalism
Grossmann, Max R. P.
General Economics
Economics
91B08, 91C99
When is autonomy granted to a decision-maker based on their knowledge, and if no autonomy is granted, what form will the intervention take? A parsimonious theoretical framework shows how policymakers can exploit decision-maker mistakes and use them as a justification for intervention. In two experiments, policymakers ("Choice Architects") can intervene in a choice faced by a decision-maker. We vary the amount of knowledge decision-makers possess about the choice. Full decision-maker knowledge causes more than a 60% reduction in intervention rates. Beliefs have a small, robust correlation with interventions on the intensive margin. Choice Architects disproportionately prefer to have decision-makers make informed decisions. Interveners are less likely to provide information. As theory predicts, the same applies to Choice Architects who believe that decision-maker mistakes align with their own preference. When Choice Architects are informed about the decision-maker's preference, this information is used to determine the imposed option. However, Choice Architects employ their own preference to a similar extent. A riskless option is causally more likely to be imposed, being correlated with but conceptually distinct from Choice Architects' own preference. This is a qualification to what has been termed "projective paternalism."
title Knowledge and Freedom: Evidence on the Relationship Between Information and Paternalism
topic General Economics
Economics
91B08, 91C99
url https://arxiv.org/abs/2410.20970