养老金计划自动登记与选择:巴西的实验研究

Q3 Social Sciences Social Security Bulletin Pub Date : 2017-06-04 DOI:10.2139/ssrn.2986409
Antonio Gualberto Pereira, Luís Eduardo Afonso
{"title":"养老金计划自动登记与选择:巴西的实验研究","authors":"Antonio Gualberto Pereira, Luís Eduardo Afonso","doi":"10.2139/ssrn.2986409","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"One alternative presented in the literature to increase adhesion to pension plans is to modify the default of choices from opt in (to adhere to the plan) to opt out (leave the plan), a nudge typical of the libertarian paternalism (Kahneman, 2002). An experimental design was adopted, adapted from a tool by Hey (2007). The research was made available with the assistance of Questionpro© and sent to respondents in Brazil through social networks from July to December 2015. 241 answers were obtained. The experiment was composed of a control group and two treatment groups. In both groups, individuals made decisions throughout nine periods: five in the work stage and four in the post-retirement stage. In the control group, the participant chose if he/she wanted to save part of the income (USD 260.00 per period, equivalent to BRL 1,000.00) as well as decide which of the pension plans to contribute to. Three possible plans were offered to the participants with different risk profiles: plan 1 (with the same probability of earning 1.4% or 5.2% per period), plan 2 (1.5% or 4.3%), and plan 3 (1.6% or 3.4%). In treatment group 1, the participant was automatically enrolled in the standard plan and could decide in the following periods, if he/she wanted to continue contributing to a plan, at which percentage, and for which of the plans offered. The results suggest that the pension funds with automatic enrollment, parity contribution of the sponsor, and absence of the element of risk, positively influence the decision of adhesion to the plan. In this scenario, there was a longer permanence in this plan compared to the control scenario in which the design of the plan did not present such characteristics (p-value < 0.01). This conclusion is in line with the work of the nudge theory (Orenstein, 2013; Thaler & Sustein, 2008).","PeriodicalId":39542,"journal":{"name":"Social Security Bulletin","volume":"33 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2017-06-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Automatic Enrollment and Choices of Pension Plans: An Experimental Study in Brazil\",\"authors\":\"Antonio Gualberto Pereira, Luís Eduardo Afonso\",\"doi\":\"10.2139/ssrn.2986409\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"One alternative presented in the literature to increase adhesion to pension plans is to modify the default of choices from opt in (to adhere to the plan) to opt out (leave the plan), a nudge typical of the libertarian paternalism (Kahneman, 2002). An experimental design was adopted, adapted from a tool by Hey (2007). The research was made available with the assistance of Questionpro© and sent to respondents in Brazil through social networks from July to December 2015. 241 answers were obtained. The experiment was composed of a control group and two treatment groups. In both groups, individuals made decisions throughout nine periods: five in the work stage and four in the post-retirement stage. In the control group, the participant chose if he/she wanted to save part of the income (USD 260.00 per period, equivalent to BRL 1,000.00) as well as decide which of the pension plans to contribute to. Three possible plans were offered to the participants with different risk profiles: plan 1 (with the same probability of earning 1.4% or 5.2% per period), plan 2 (1.5% or 4.3%), and plan 3 (1.6% or 3.4%). In treatment group 1, the participant was automatically enrolled in the standard plan and could decide in the following periods, if he/she wanted to continue contributing to a plan, at which percentage, and for which of the plans offered. The results suggest that the pension funds with automatic enrollment, parity contribution of the sponsor, and absence of the element of risk, positively influence the decision of adhesion to the plan. In this scenario, there was a longer permanence in this plan compared to the control scenario in which the design of the plan did not present such characteristics (p-value < 0.01). This conclusion is in line with the work of the nudge theory (Orenstein, 2013; Thaler & Sustein, 2008).\",\"PeriodicalId\":39542,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Social Security Bulletin\",\"volume\":\"33 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2017-06-04\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Social Security Bulletin\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2986409\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"Social Sciences\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Social Security Bulletin","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2986409","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"Social Sciences","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

文献中提出的一种增加对养老金计划粘附性的替代方案是修改默认选择,从选择加入(坚持计划)到选择退出(退出计划),这是一种典型的自由意志主义家长式作风(Kahneman, 2002)。采用实验设计,改编自Hey(2007)的工具。该研究是在Questionpro©的帮助下提供的,并于2015年7月至12月通过社交网络发送给巴西的受访者。共得到241个答案。实验分为1个对照组和2个治疗组。在这两组中,个人在九个阶段做出决定:五个在工作阶段,四个在退休后阶段。在对照组中,参与者选择是否要储蓄部分收入(每期260.00美元,相当于10000.00巴西雷亚尔),并决定向哪个养老金计划缴费。三种可能的计划被提供给具有不同风险概况的参与者:计划1(每个时期获得1.4%或5.2%的相同概率),计划2(1.5%或4.3%)和计划3(1.6%或3.4%)。在治疗组1中,参与者自动加入标准计划,并可以在接下来的一段时间内决定他/她是否想继续为一个计划缴费,按多少百分比缴费,以及为哪个计划缴费。结果表明,自动入职养老基金、保荐人的均等缴费和风险因素的缺失,正影响着参保决策。在该方案中,该方案的持久性比未呈现该特征的控制方案的持久性更长(p值< 0.01)。这一结论与助推理论的工作是一致的(Orenstein, 2013;Thaler & susstein, 2008)。
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
Automatic Enrollment and Choices of Pension Plans: An Experimental Study in Brazil
One alternative presented in the literature to increase adhesion to pension plans is to modify the default of choices from opt in (to adhere to the plan) to opt out (leave the plan), a nudge typical of the libertarian paternalism (Kahneman, 2002). An experimental design was adopted, adapted from a tool by Hey (2007). The research was made available with the assistance of Questionpro© and sent to respondents in Brazil through social networks from July to December 2015. 241 answers were obtained. The experiment was composed of a control group and two treatment groups. In both groups, individuals made decisions throughout nine periods: five in the work stage and four in the post-retirement stage. In the control group, the participant chose if he/she wanted to save part of the income (USD 260.00 per period, equivalent to BRL 1,000.00) as well as decide which of the pension plans to contribute to. Three possible plans were offered to the participants with different risk profiles: plan 1 (with the same probability of earning 1.4% or 5.2% per period), plan 2 (1.5% or 4.3%), and plan 3 (1.6% or 3.4%). In treatment group 1, the participant was automatically enrolled in the standard plan and could decide in the following periods, if he/she wanted to continue contributing to a plan, at which percentage, and for which of the plans offered. The results suggest that the pension funds with automatic enrollment, parity contribution of the sponsor, and absence of the element of risk, positively influence the decision of adhesion to the plan. In this scenario, there was a longer permanence in this plan compared to the control scenario in which the design of the plan did not present such characteristics (p-value < 0.01). This conclusion is in line with the work of the nudge theory (Orenstein, 2013; Thaler & Sustein, 2008).
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
Social Security Bulletin
Social Security Bulletin Social Sciences-Social Sciences (miscellaneous)
CiteScore
0.70
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Introduction: Present Principles Industrial Life Assurance Widows', Orphans' and Old Age Pensions Finance of the Social Services National Health Insurance
×
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