The Role of Personal Preferences in Economics
Prof. Dr Thomas Dohmen from the Institute for Applied Microeconomics, University of Bonn, Germany is to deliver an honorary lecture at the upcoming April Academic Conference at HSE University April 9 – 12. HSE News Service spoke with Dr. Dohmen about his work on the Global Preferences Survey (GPS), an international survey of epic proportions that he helped develop and analyze in order to learn whether individuals differ in terms of economic preferences by country, and more.
Global Preferences Survey
People's preferences—particularly regarding risk, the timing of rewards, reciprocity, altruism and trust—are important in economics because preferences like these drive people's decisions, and ultimately, economic outcomes
Many empirical studies provide insights into individual-level preferences within certain populations, but much less is known about how these preferences vary worldwide. This is partly because, until recently, no global data set existed that captured these preferences. Together with my co-authors Armin Falk, David Huffman, Uwe Sunde, Anke Becker and Benjamin Enke, we have developed such a data set, the Global Preferences Survey (GPS).
This data set that we describe in our journal article, ‘Global Evidence on Economic Preferences,’ includes survey measures of time preference, risk preference, unconditional altruism, positive and negative reciprocity and trust for 80,000 adults in 76 countries that represent about 90% of the world's population. The survey data was collected through the framework of the 2012 Gallup World Poll, which ensures a standardized survey method for the 80,000 respondents across countries. The data set is described in detail on the GPS homepage, which also offers an interactive tool to compare preferences across countries, and allows researchers to download the questionnaires and access the data and resources to replicate the results.
In each country, representative population samples of about 1000 respondents – in Russia we surveyed 1498 individuals – answered 12 survey questions that were designed to measure time preference, risk preference, altruism, positive reciprocity, negative reciprocity, and trust. These were selected in an initial survey validation study, in which the GPS preference measures were selected based on their performance to predict choices in incentivized choice experiments for each preference. The survey questions were also pretested in culturally heterogeneous countries.
What the Survey Shows
The survey allowed us to gauge heterogeneity across countries and to answer a set of very important questions, such as: Do countries differ in terms of average preferences? Are differences in aggregate preference profiles correlated with the cross-country variation in outcomes such as economic development, charitable activities, or violent conflict? Are country-level preference profiles related to differences in geography, culture, language, or religion? How large is cross-country variation in preferences relative to within-country variation? How does individual-level heterogeneity in financial, labor market, or prosocial choices vary with preferences around the world?
Answers to these questions help us to understand why important economic outcomes differ within and across countries. They might also contribute to an understanding of why certain countries are richer than others, why countries have different institutions and forms of social interaction, why different policies work differently in different countries, why mutual agreements can be more easily reached between some countries than others, etc.
How Preferences Differ
People's preferences vary from country to country, but the differences are even larger within countries and these individual characteristics may be even more important
Many of the world's most patient populations—based on their answers to questions about immediate vs. delayed rewards—are located in Europe or the English-speaking world, while risk-taking preferences are particularly prevalent in Africa and the Middle East. Prosocial preferences (altruism, reciprocity and trust) are pronounced throughout Asia and relatively weak in sub-Saharan Africa.
At the individual level, people's preferences differ by gender, age and cognitive ability. For example, women are more impatient, less risk-tolerant and more prosocial than men. Cognitive skills and age are linked to all of the risk, time and prosocial preferences. Yet these relationships, to some degree, are country-specific. While the relationships with risk-aversion and gender are in same direction in most countries, the age profile for patience depends on the country's development level.
At the country level, there are links between preferences and biogeographic and cultural variables, such as absolute latitude, the presence of large, domesticable animals and agricultural suitability. Patience, specifically, is strongly positively related to a set of variables previously associated with comparative development, namely Protestantism and measures of individualism.
People's preferences are linked to behaviors and economic outcomes
Within countries, patient individuals are more likely to save and have higher educational attainment, and more risk-tolerant individuals are more likely to be self-employed and smoke. Social preferences are predictive of prosocial behaviors and outcomes, such as donating, volunteering time and providing help to strangers, friends and relatives.
Across countries, preferences vary with outcomes ranging from per capita income to entrepreneurial activities to the frequency of armed conflicts.
The data from the survey allow us to determine that people's preferences vary by country and within-country around the world, and that these differences are linked to both individual-level and aggregate cultural and biogeographic characteristics. The results also provide evidence that these differences in preferences are relevant to economic outcomes. However, much more can be learned from this global survey. The novel raw correlations we found between country-level profiles and aggregate economic outcomes call for a more detailed analysis of the underlying causes.
Future Research in Behavioral Economics and Collaboration with HSE
I have been successfully collaborating with Hartmut Lehmann since more than a decade. We initially worked on projects in which we used personnel data to better understand how labor market outcomes were shaped during transition. Later, Hartmut and I introduced preference measures in the Ukrainian Longitudinal Monitoring Survey (ULMS) and studied how preferences interact with labor market outcomes. In 2017, we teamed up with Vladimir Gimpelson to study how character skills and preferences in interplay with cognition affect labor market outcomes in Russia. To this end, we also plan to introduce the GPS preference module into the Russian Longitudinal Monitoring Survey (RLMS). HSE is an ideal partner in this endeavor.
The HSE Centre for Studies of Income and Living Standards studied the dynamics of the middle class and its behaviour with regard to paid services. The study was based on data drawn from the HSE Russian Longitudinal Monitoring Survey (RLMS-HSE) for the years 2000 to 2017, and the results were presented at the 20th April International Academic Conference hosted by HSE.
Reproductive behavior is modernizing at different rates in post-Soviet countries. Things are changing faster in Russia, Armenia, Georgia and Ukraine, where, over the last fifteen years, the average maternity age has increased and the contribution of women in their thirties to their countries’ birthrates has grown. Meanwhile, old reproductive patterns persist in Azerbaijan, Kazakhstan and Kyrgyzstan, where firstborns are usually born to parents under 30, demographers Vladimir Kozlov and Konstantin Kazenin note in a paper delivered at HSE’s XX April International Academic Conference.
More than half of school graduates in medium-sized Russian cities will change their place of residence either forever or at least for a long time. According a report on internal migration presented by HSE demographers at the XX April International Academic Conference, these people are lost to their cities.
As part of the Management session of the XX April International Conference, Carl F. Fey from Aalto University School of Business, Finland, presented his paper on Facilitating Innovation in Companies in Russia: The Role of Organizational Culture. In his talk, Professor Fey spoke about the results of three studies he has been conducting with his team.
How does digital technology affect the behavior and health of schoolchildren? What opportunities does it proved teachers and school administrators? These and other issues were discussed by participants in the plenary session ‘Children’s Wellbeing in the Digital Age’ at the XX April International Scientific Conference of HSE.
Implementing a digital analytical platform, opportunities for Big Data, and other prospects for the development of Russian statistics were discussed by participants at a plenary session of the XX April International Academic Conference.
Dr. Dorothy Espelage (University of Florida) presented a comprehensive account of her research into youth bullying spanning more than two decades in an invited paper ‘Prevention & Intervention of Youth Bullying and other Forms of Youth Aggression: Research Informed Strategies’ at the XX April International Academic Conference.
The role of regional and industrial institutions of higher education in achieving national development goals must increase, and leading universities will help them. This was the conclusion reached by participants of the plenary session on Russian higher education that took place as part of the XX April International Academic Conference.
The plenary session ‘Strategy of Russian Presence at Global Food Markets’ took place as part of HSE University’s XX April International Academic Conference, where participants discussed the prospects for Russian agricultural exports to Asia, as well as the use of nonconventional investment models, such as Islamic financial tools.
National objectives for social development, as well as existing risks and opportunities in implementing these objectives were discussed by participants of HSE International April Conference.