其他人都在犯错:同伴错误对储蓄决策的影响

Elizabeth A. Perry
{"title":"其他人都在犯错:同伴错误对储蓄决策的影响","authors":"Elizabeth A. Perry","doi":"10.2139/ssrn.3348672","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This paper describes an intervention to increase retirement saving among 1,254 federal employees. Specifically, we sent two emails encouraging employees to leave the default retirement contribution amount (3 percent of salary) and start saving enough to get the full match available to them (at least 5 percent of salary). Email 1 provided employees with personalized information, while Email 2 included similar information about their peers. We find that after 3.5 months, those who received either email were more than twice as likely to increase their contributions compared to those who received no email. Results both support previous research that personalized information can motivate action and raise questions about the nuances of peer influence.","PeriodicalId":252294,"journal":{"name":"Household Financial Planning eJournal","volume":"55 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2019-02-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Everyone Else Is Making a Mistake: Effects of Peer Error on Saving Decisions\",\"authors\":\"Elizabeth A. Perry\",\"doi\":\"10.2139/ssrn.3348672\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"This paper describes an intervention to increase retirement saving among 1,254 federal employees. Specifically, we sent two emails encouraging employees to leave the default retirement contribution amount (3 percent of salary) and start saving enough to get the full match available to them (at least 5 percent of salary). Email 1 provided employees with personalized information, while Email 2 included similar information about their peers. We find that after 3.5 months, those who received either email were more than twice as likely to increase their contributions compared to those who received no email. Results both support previous research that personalized information can motivate action and raise questions about the nuances of peer influence.\",\"PeriodicalId\":252294,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Household Financial Planning eJournal\",\"volume\":\"55 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2019-02-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Household Financial Planning eJournal\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3348672\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Household Financial Planning eJournal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3348672","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

摘要

本文描述了1254名联邦雇员增加退休储蓄的干预措施。具体来说,我们发送了两封电子邮件,鼓励员工保留默认的退休缴款金额(工资的3%),并开始攒足够的钱,以获得他们可以获得的全部匹配(至少工资的5%)。电子邮件1提供了员工的个性化信息,而电子邮件2包含了他们同事的类似信息。我们发现,3.5个月后,收到任何一封邮件的人增加捐款的可能性是没有收到邮件的人的两倍多。结果都支持了先前的研究,即个性化信息可以激励行动,并提出了关于同伴影响的细微差别的问题。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Everyone Else Is Making a Mistake: Effects of Peer Error on Saving Decisions
This paper describes an intervention to increase retirement saving among 1,254 federal employees. Specifically, we sent two emails encouraging employees to leave the default retirement contribution amount (3 percent of salary) and start saving enough to get the full match available to them (at least 5 percent of salary). Email 1 provided employees with personalized information, while Email 2 included similar information about their peers. We find that after 3.5 months, those who received either email were more than twice as likely to increase their contributions compared to those who received no email. Results both support previous research that personalized information can motivate action and raise questions about the nuances of peer influence.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
The Evolution of Financial Services in the Digital Age Investor Experience and Portfolio Choice New Frontiers of Robo-Advising: Consumption, Saving, Debt Management, and Taxes ETF Heartbeat Trades, Tax Efficiencies, and Clienteles: The Role of Taxes in the Flow Migration from Active Mutual Funds to ETFs Perceived Financial Preparedness, Saving Habits, and Financial Security
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1