The DOI matches its Crossref record; 22 of the 22 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Psychology and Economics: Evidence from the Field
Open accessAbstract
The research in Psychology and Economics (a.k.a.Behavioral Economics) suggests that individuals deviate from the standard model in three respects: (i) non-standard preferences; (ii) non-standard beliefs; and (iii) non-standard decision-making.In this paper, I survey the empirical evidence from the field on these three classes of deviations.The evidence covers a number of applications, from consumption to finance, from crime to voting, from giving to labor supply.In the class of non-standard preferences, I discuss time preferences (self-control problems), risk preferences (reference dependence), and social preferences.On non-standard beliefs, I present evidence on overconfidence, on the law of small numbers, and on projection bias.Regarding non-standard decision-making, I cover limited attention, menu effects, persuasion and social pressure, and emotions.I also present evidence on how rational actors --firms, employers, CEOs, investors, and politicians --respond to the non-standard behavior described in the survey.I then summarize five common empirical methodologies used in Psychology and Economics.Finally, I briefly discuss under what conditions experience and market interactions limit the impact of the non-standard features.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Prospect Theory: An Analysis of Decision under Risk
Kahneman, D., & Tversky, A. (1979) · Econometrica · doi:10.2307/1914185 · Cited by 48,524
Advances in prospect theory: Cumulative representation of uncertainty
Tversky, A., & Kahneman, D. (1992) · Journal of Risk and Uncertainty · doi:10.1007/bf00122574 · Cited by 15,467
“Risk, Ambiguity, and the Savage Axioms.”
Ellsberg, D. (1961) · The Quarterly Journal of Economics · doi:10.2307/1884324 · Cited by 7,891
Golden eggs and hyperbolic discounting
Laibson, D. (1997) · The Quarterly Journal of Economics · doi:10.1162/003355397555253 · Cited by 6,122
By Force of Habit: A Consumption‐Based Explanation of Aggregate Stock Market Behavior
Campbell, J. Y., & Cochrane, J. H. (1999) · Journal of Political Economy · doi:10.1086/250059 · Cited by 5,210
Unrealistic optimism about future life events
Weinstein, N. D. (1980) · Journal of Personality and Social Psychology · doi:10.1037/0022-3514.39.5.806 · Cited by 4,999
Schwarz, N., & Clore, G. L. (1983) · Journal of Personality and Social Psychology · doi:10.1037/0022-3514.45.3.513 · Cited by 4,952
Behavioral Study of obedience.
Milgram, S. (1963) · The Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology · doi:10.1037/h0040525 · Cited by 4,918
Broadbent, D. E. (1958) · doi:10.1037/10037-000 · Cited by 4,337
Understanding Social Preferences with Simple Tests
Charness, G., & Rabin, M. (2002) · The Quarterly Journal of Economics · doi:10.1162/003355302760193904 · Cited by 3,970
Cited by
Savings by and for the Poor: A Research Review and Agenda
Karlan, D., Ratan, A. L., & Zinman, J. (2014) · Review of Income and Wealth · doi:10.1111/roiw.12101 · Cited by 548
The Nature of Risk Preferences: Evidence from Insurance Choices
Barseghyan, L., Molinari, F., O'Donoghue, T., & Teitelbaum, J. C. (2013) · American Economic Review · doi:10.1257/aer.103.6.2499 · Cited by 348
Bernheim, B. D., Ray, D., & Yeltekin, S. (2013) · Econometrica · doi:10.3386/w18742 · Cited by 269
SELECTIVE ATTENTION AND LEARNING
Schwartzstein, J. (2014) · Journal of the European Economic Association · doi:10.1111/jeea.12104 · Cited by 269
Keys, B. J., Pope, D. G., & Pope, J. C. (2016) · Journal of Financial Economics · doi:10.1016/j.jfineco.2016.01.031 · Cited by 262
Metadata
- Authors
- DellaVigna, S.
- Venue
- National Bureau of Economic Research
- Publisher
- National Bureau of Economic Research
- Published
- 2007-09
- OpenAlex
- W2343630645
- Cited by
- 233
- References
- 22
- Type
- report
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Psychology and Economics: Evidence from the Field. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.3386/w13420
- The paper
- DellaVigna, S. (2007). Psychology and Economics: Evidence from the Field. National Bureau of Economic Research. https://doi.org/10.3386/w13420
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.