We show that a one-off incentive to bias advice has persistent effects. In an experiment, advisers were paid a bonus to recommend a lottery which only risk-seeking individuals should choose to a less informed client. Afterwards, they had to choose for themselves and make a second recommendation to another client, without any bonus. These advisers choose the risky lottery and recommend it a second time up to six times more often than advisers in a control group who were never offered a bonus. These results are consistent with a theory we present which is based on advisers' image concerns of appearing incorruptible
textabstractThis paper investigates how letting people predict others’ choices under risk affects su...
We present results from an experiment involving 1,500 participants on whether, when and why good adv...
International audienceWe present a new experimental evidence of how framing affects decisions in the...
Professionals often give advice to many anonymous people. For example, financial analysts give publi...
Expert advice is often biased in ways that benefit the advisor. We demonstrate how self-deception he...
Zhuoqiong Chen, PhD student in Business Economics, experimentally analyses that removing commissions...
Risk-taking is critical to decisions. Unfortunately, information about risk is not always available,...
Using an online incentivized discrete choice experiment, we study how well individuals judge financi...
This paper attempts to empirically assess how advice may reduce suboptimality in a portfolio choice ...
We present a model of investors acquiring forecasts from a group of advisers (analysts), some of whi...
This paper attempts to empirically assess how advice may reduce suboptimality in a portfolio choice ...
When can an expert be trusted to provide useful advice? We experimentally test a simplified recommen...
Recipients of advice expect it to be both highly informed and honest. Suspecting either one of these...
Why can initial biases persist in repeated choice tasks? Previous research has shown that frequent r...
We quantify the widespread and significant economic impact of first impressions and confirmation bia...
textabstractThis paper investigates how letting people predict others’ choices under risk affects su...
We present results from an experiment involving 1,500 participants on whether, when and why good adv...
International audienceWe present a new experimental evidence of how framing affects decisions in the...
Professionals often give advice to many anonymous people. For example, financial analysts give publi...
Expert advice is often biased in ways that benefit the advisor. We demonstrate how self-deception he...
Zhuoqiong Chen, PhD student in Business Economics, experimentally analyses that removing commissions...
Risk-taking is critical to decisions. Unfortunately, information about risk is not always available,...
Using an online incentivized discrete choice experiment, we study how well individuals judge financi...
This paper attempts to empirically assess how advice may reduce suboptimality in a portfolio choice ...
We present a model of investors acquiring forecasts from a group of advisers (analysts), some of whi...
This paper attempts to empirically assess how advice may reduce suboptimality in a portfolio choice ...
When can an expert be trusted to provide useful advice? We experimentally test a simplified recommen...
Recipients of advice expect it to be both highly informed and honest. Suspecting either one of these...
Why can initial biases persist in repeated choice tasks? Previous research has shown that frequent r...
We quantify the widespread and significant economic impact of first impressions and confirmation bia...
textabstractThis paper investigates how letting people predict others’ choices under risk affects su...
We present results from an experiment involving 1,500 participants on whether, when and why good adv...
International audienceWe present a new experimental evidence of how framing affects decisions in the...