We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
To save content items to your account,
please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies.
If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account.
Find out more about saving content to .
To save content items to your Kindle, first ensure no-reply@cambridge.org
is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings
on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part
of your Kindle email address below.
Find out more about saving to your Kindle.
Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations.
‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi.
‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.
This article surveys the rapidly growing literature that examined the influence of Covid-19 on preferences. Based on 33 studies, the article examines how the pandemic impacted altruism, cooperation, trust, inequity aversion, risk-taking, and patience/time discounting. Even though the survey suggests the effect of the pandemic on preferences is heterogeneous, some noticeable patterns can be observed in the literature. First, in the case of incentivized preference elicitation, there is weak evidence that the pandemic positively influenced altruism and had no significant impact on time preferences or patience. Second, many studies that used balanced panel data and incentivized preference elicitation mechanisms do not find a significant effect of the pandemic on preferences. Last, studies that used unincentivized methods to elicit preferences show relatively higher variability in results when compared to the studies that used incentivized methods for preference elicitation. The organized synthesis and several noticeable patterns can help future research focusing on preference stability during Covid-19 and other unfavorable events.
This article replicates an experiment by Coffman et al. (Manag Sci 67(6):3551–3569, 2021) who separated taste-based and statistical discrimination by comparing employer choices in one of two hiring environments (treatments). Both treatments were characterized by the same ability distributions of workers in tasks on which men are found to outperform women on average, but only one allowed for gender-specific considerations. We found statistical discrimination against women when they are presented to employers not as women, but as people belonging to a low-performance group, but discrimination in their favor when their gender is revealed to potential employers. This discrimination in favor of women was observed in both male and female employers. It was greater when employers were women and disappeared when monetary incentives to employ more productive workers were higher for employers.
If stimulus responses are linearly related to squared distances between stimulus scale values and person scores along a latent continuum, (a) the stimulus × stimulus correlation matrix will display a simplex-like pattern, (b) the signs of first-order partial correlations can be specified in an empirically testable manner, and (c) the variables will have a semicircular, two-factor structure. Along the semicircle, variables will be ordered by their positions on the latent dimension. The above results suggest procedures for examining the appropriateness of the model and procedures for ordering the stimuli. Applications to developmental and attitudinal data are discussed.
Reduced exposure to sweet taste has been proposed to reduce sweet food preferences and intakes, but the evidence to support these associations is limited. This randomised controlled trial investigated the effects of a whole-diet sweet taste intervention for 6 d, on subsequent pleasantness, desire for and sweet food intakes. Participants (n 104) were randomised to increase (n 40), decrease (n 43) or make no change to (n 21) their consumption of sweet-tasting foods and beverages for 6 consecutive days. Pleasantness, desire to eat, sweet taste intensity and sweet food and beverage intakes were assessed on days 0 and 7. One hundred and two (98 %) participants completed the study, and self-reported adherence with the dietary interventions was moderate to good (M = 66–72/100 mm), with instructions to decrease sweet food consumption reported as more difficult than the other diets (smallest (t(81) = 2·45, P = 0·02, Mdiff = 14/100 mm, se = 2 mm). In intention-to-treat analyses, participants in the decreased sweet food consumption group reported higher sweet taste intensity perceptions at day 7 compared with day 0 (F(2101) = 4·10, P = 0·02, Mdiff = 6/100 mm, se = 2 mm). No effects were found for pleasantness (F(2101) = 2·04, P = 0·14), desire to eat (F(2101) = 1·49, P = 0·23) or any of the measures of sweet food intake (largest F(2101) = 2·53, P = 0·09). These results were confirmed in regression analyses that took self-reported adherence to the diets into account. Our findings suggest that exposure to sweet taste does not affect pleasantness, desire for or intakes of sweet-tasting foods and beverages. Public health recommendations to limit the consumption of sweet-tasting foods and beverages to reduce sweet food preferences may require revision.
Universal basic income (UBI) is becoming a prominent alternative to reform the welfare state, yet public support for this policy remains a puzzle. Existing scholarship empirically shows that certain groups like the low-income and left-wing show support, but it remains unclear if this translates to a preference for UBI over alternatives. This paper argues against this assumption: UBI challenges welfare norms and deservingness principles, suggesting people would typically prefer means-tested options. Drawing on a conjoint experiment, this paper empirically shows supportive evidence of the idea that support for a UBI does not translate into an inherent preference for UBI. These findings have widespread implications for both the UBI literature and the politics of welfare reform.
Many citizens in liberal democracies are concerned about immigration and its impact on their countries. Governments often seek to address these concerns by restricting the post-entry rights of immigrants such as the right to permanent settlement or access to welfare benefits. Thereby, it is expected that immigrants with an inferior legal status are (perceived as) less threatening to natives and, as a result, make the latter more willing to accept new immigrants. Does this policy rationale indeed attenuate public opposition to immigrant admission and thus allow for the reconciliation of the economic need for immigrants with the political concerns of domestic constituents? This study advances the theoretical argument of a rights-conditionality in citizens’ immigration preferences and provides empirical evidence on the phenomenon. A factorial survey experiment among citizens in the United States and Switzerland tests the effect of residence and welfare rights on the public opposition to immigrant admission. The results show that restricting immigrants’ welfare rights does significantly decrease public opposition towards immigration across the two countries. In contrast, restricting immigrants’ residence rights does not, and in the context of Switzerland, even increases opposition to immigrant admission. Citizens critical of immigration are thus not per se more welcoming to immigrants if they receive an inferior legal status but seem to care about immigrants’ contributions and commitment to the receiving society. The findings highlight the importance of immigrants‘ post-entry rights in the view of citizens and show how the design of immigration policies may help to understand public immigration preferences.
To identify and quantify general practitioner (GP) preferences related to service attributes of clinical consultations, including telehealth consultations, in Australia.
Background:
GPs have been increasingly using telehealth to deliver patient care since the onset of the 2019 coronavirus disease (COVID-19) pandemic. GP preferences for telehealth service models will play an important role in the uptake and sustainability of telehealth services post-pandemic.
Methods:
An online survey was used to ask GPs general telehealth questions and have them complete a discrete choice experiment (DCE). The DCE elicited GP preferences for various service attributes of telehealth (telephone and videoconference) consultations. The DCE investigated five service attributes, including consultation mode, consultation purpose, consultation length, quality of care and rapport, and patient co-payment. Participants were presented with eight choice sets, each containing three options to choose from. Descriptive statistics was used, and mixed logit models were used to estimate and analyse the DCE data.
Findings:
A total of 60 GPs fully completed the survey. Previous telehealth experiences impacted direct preferences towards telehealth consultations across clinical presentations, although in-person modes were generally favoured (in approximately 70% of all scenarios). The DCE results lacked statistical significance which demonstrated undiscernible differences between GP preferences for some service attributes. However, it was found that GPs prefer to provide a consultation with good quality care and rapport (P < 002). GPs would also prefer to provide care to their patients rather than decline a consultation due to consultation mode, length or purpose (P < 0.0001). Based on the findings, GPs value the ability to provide high-quality care and develop rapport during a clinical consultation. This highlights the importance of recognising value-based care for future policy reforms, to ensure continued adoption and sustainability of GP telehealth services in Australia.
This chapter focuses on the impact of CEE countries on the development of climate and energy policies at the EU level. It is argued that states in the region demonstrate some shared preferences and utilise regional groupings to promote these at the EU level. The chapter discusses the contribution of CEE countries to the development of EU policy – such as Polish efforts to create an ‘Energy NATO’, CEE countries’ efforts to improve energy security following the 2006 and 2009 gas crises, the 2014 Energy Union, and the reaction to the full-scale Russian invasion of Ukraine in 2022. The chapter argues that the security dimension was given priority by CEE countries at the EU level. They contributed to placing energy security on the EU’s agenda during accession negotiations and the immediate post-accession period; however, their preferences were often not shared by older members. It was the 2006 and 2009 gas supply disruptions that shifted the focus towards energy security in the region, and at the EU level. In 2022 the EU’s dependency on and vulnerability to high levels of energy imports from Russia were brought into sharp focus.
This chapter explores aspects of Sen’s analysis of self-interest and commitment, seeking to highlight their interplay by probing some imagined situations. Detailing three facets of self-interest the author detects in traditional economic theory and the two forms of committed behaviour he then identifies (not confining one’s goals to the pursuit of ones own welfare and not basing one’s choices exclusively on one’s goals at the expense of those of others), the implied eightfold pattern of interrelations between these subtle concepts is presented, illustrated by a hypothetical internet dating conundrum. Sen’s stress on the self as a reasoning, self-scrutinizing agent who may but (in contrast with much prevailing theory) need not choose on the basis of self-interest underpins an account of rational choice that pays more respect to individual freedom, with significance in economics. Using an example outlining conflicting duties and pressures UK MPs might have felt during Brexit votes, Sen’s account is defended against attacks that, through reliance on strained definitions of interests and goals, seem to over-exploit the potential malleability of language.
The retrieval of past instances stored in memory can guide inferential choices and judgments. Yet, little process-level evidence exists that would allow a similar conclusion for preferential judgments. Recent research suggests that eye movements can trace information search in memory. During retrieval, people gaze at spatial locations associated with relevant information, even if the information is no longer present (the so-called ‘looking-at-nothing’ behavior). We examined eye movements based on the looking-at-nothing behavior to explore memory retrieval in inferential and preferential judgments. In Experiment 1, participants assessed their preference for smoothies with different ingredients, while the other half gauged another person’s preference. In Experiment 2, all participants made preferential judgments with or without instructions to respond as consistently as possible. People looked at exemplar locations in both inferential and preferential judgments, and both with and without consistency instructions. Eye movements to similar training exemplars predicted test judgments but not eye movements to dissimilar exemplars. These results suggest that people retrieve exemplar information in preferential judgments but that retrieval processes are not the sole determinant of judgments.
This chapter introduces the basics of the economic approach to understanding decision-making. This is done using examples drawn from consumer decision-making in the context of healthcare. Topics include how to think about preferences, different types of costs, optimization, and the importance of perceptions. The end of chapter supplement discusses how to use price indexes.
Survey experiments are an important tool to measure policy preferences. Researchers often rely on the random assignment of policy attribute levels to estimate different types of average marginal effects. Yet, researchers are often interested in how respondents trade-off different policy dimensions. We use a conjoint experiment administered to more than 10,000 respondents in Germany, to study preferences over personal freedoms and public welfare during the COVID-19 crisis. Using a pre-registered structural model, we estimate policy ideal points and indifference curves to assess the conditions under which citizens are willing to sacrifice freedoms in the interest of public well-being. We document broad willingness to accept restrictions on rights alongside sharp heterogeneity with respect to vaccination status. The majority of citizens are vaccinated and strongly support limitations on freedoms in response to extreme conditions—especially, when they vaccinated themselves are exempted from these limitations. The unvaccinated minority prefers no restrictions on freedoms regardless of the severity of the pandemic. These policy packages also matter for reported trust in government, in opposite ways for vaccinated and unvaccinated citizens.
Duncan Black, like Adam Smith before him, was trained at, and taught at, the University of Glasgow. Like Smith, Black followed the Enlightenment in appreciating the importance of theory and of its empirical applications. Black sought to apply the ideas of a schedule of preferences and a conception of equilibrium, to politics, as Smith had done in economics. Black believed that his median voter theorem could generalize to a theory of politics, much as Smith’s contributions did for market economics. Black did not complete that generalization, but William Riker did offer a theory of institutional politics, designed to complete Black’s project.
Electoral systems fulfill different functions. Typically, they cannot meet all demands at the same time, so that the evaluation of specific electoral systems depends on subjective preferences about the single demands. We argue that it is the electorate which transfers its power to representatives and, therefore, its preferences should be considered in debates about electoral systems. Consequently, our contribution presents results of citizens’ demands regarding electoral system attributes. Specifically, we rely on a large-scale conjoint experiment conducted in Germany, the Netherlands, and the UK in which subjects were asked to choose between two electoral systems which randomly differed on a set of attributes referring to electoral systems’ core functions. Our results show that all core functions are generally of importance for the respondents but reveal a higher preference for proportional electoral systems. These preferences are largely stable for citizens in different countries but also for other subgroups of subjects.
Mainstream economics portrays individual agents as choosing rationally. Many of its generalizations concerning how people actually choose are also claims about how agents ought rationally to choose. Chapter 1 focuses on the conception of rationality that is incorporated in contemporary economics and is central to it. It begins with the concept of preferences, which is the central concept in mainstream economics, and with the theory of rationality that focuses on preferences. The fact that a normative theory lies at the foundation of economics raises philosophical questions. What are requirements of rationality doing in what purports to be a scientific theory of economic phenomena? After presenting the axioms of ordinal utility theory, it offers an account of preferences, a critique of revealed preference theory, and an introduction to expected utility theory. It argues that if one wants to understand economics, the modeling of rationality is the place to begin.
There are fundamental commonalities in the way nationalists view the economy and these commonalities are important enough to speak of a distinct nationalist approach to economic thought and policy. This does not mean all nationalists think and act in the same way – many policy positions are hotly contested among nationalists. But it does mean that nationalists choose their economic aims from a common menu. This introduction develops a conceptual framework to investigate this policy menu. I argue that the basic options on this menu are, firstly, isolation from the world economy, and secondly, economic expansion. Attempts to overcome the potential conflict between these two aims drives much of nationalist policy making. The introduction then focusses on solutions nationalists have used to overcome this dilemma through compromise, regulation, political reform, or imperial expansion. It proceeds to discuss the degree to which these choices are determined by interests or ideas, and finishes by analysing how such ideas are commonly translated into policy.
Preferences for nest box size and position were tested in two groups of common marmoset, Callithrix jacchus jacchus. In a pre-test phase two, new, wooden nest boxes were introduced to each group alongside their old metal one, so that the animals could become familiar with them, and so that any pre-existing preference could be identified. In successive experiments: i) the old metal nest box was closed so that the marmosets had to choose a preferred box from the two new nest boxes; ii) the size of the preferred nest box was systematically reduced; and iii) in one of the groups the reduced nest box was restored to full size, but its position interchanged with the non-preferred box. In a further experiment, the position of the preferred, and then of the non-preferred box was raised to the highest point in the cage. The marmosets showed strong positional preferences which could not have been predicted without performing the tests. One of the groups also showed a strong preference for the high nest box. It was concluded that marmosets may exhibit preferences for their cage furniture, the basis of which may not be clear to us. These preferences should, however, be taken into account when designing cages to maximize the welfare of the animals.
A captive group of white-faced capuchins, Cebus capucinus, was presented with four deep litters in simultaneous choice (or preference) tests. A floor covering of ground corn cob, woodchips, wood wool or peat was presented once in each quarter of the group ‘s indoor floor-area for 14 consecutive days, and the layout of the litters was rotated after each such period. The monkeys were observed on 10 days in each period to determine the occurrence of locomotion, foraging, play, and social contact on each of the litters. The ground corn cob was clearly the least attractive floor covering for the monkeys, while peat and wood wool proved to be the most attractive. Most instances of social contact occurred on the peat, due to the occurrence of communal peat-bathing, while wood wool afforded the most play. The provision of different litter types in different areas of the indoor enclosure is a simple means of promoting a greater range of natural activities in captive primates, and probably also in other animals.
There has been much consideration of well-being in philosophy, especially of human well-being, which contributes to our understanding of animal welfare. Three common approaches to well-being are presented here, which map approximately onto three possible ideas about animal welfare. Perfectionism and other forms of ‘objective list’ theories suggest that there are various values that should be realised or various things that an individual ought to have for his life to be a good life. In the case of humans, this is based on the concept of human nature. This approach is reflected in two ideas about animal welfare: first, that animals should live natural lives (which includes consideration of an animal's nature or ‘telos’), and second, that welfare is concerned with functioning or fitness of animals. The two other approaches are subjective: in other words, they relate solely to the mental processes of the subject. The first, desire fulfilment, suggests that well-being is defined by the satisfaction of desires or preferences. The other, hedonism, states that well-being is the presence of pleasant mental states and the absence of unpleasant ones. These two approaches are both relevant to the idea that the welfare of animals relates solely to their feelings. That idea corresponds most closely to hedonism, so it may be that preferences are most relevant in helping to reveal feelings. However, it is sometimes implied that satisfaction of preferences is itself part of feelings. It would also be possible to maintain, as in the desire fulfilment approach to human well-being, that animal welfare consists of preference satisfaction itself. These possibilities need to be more clearly distinguished. Arguments for and against each approach to well-being are presented, so that scientists may be more aware of the strengths and weaknesses of their own ideas about animal welfare.
Two experiments were carried out to determine whether lighting conditions during handling affected heart rate or behaviour in farmed red deer. In Experiment 1 heart rate was measured in 24 individual deer, held under restraint in a mechanical deer crush for two minutes, under either dark (0lux) or light (1500lux) conditions. A stethoscope was used to monitor heartbeat which was indicated vocally by the stethoscope operator on to a Dictaphone. In Experiment 2, 10 groups of three deer were confined for four minutes in an unfamiliar 4×6m light-proof pen with lighting provided either on the left or right-hand side of the pen, to provide a gradient across the pen from approximately 12 to 1000lux. For the first two minutes the deer were alone and for the second two minutes a person stood in the pen. An infrared video camera was used to record behaviour.
In Experiment 1, heart rate was lower (P < 0.05) in the dark compared with in the light when recording commenced, thereafter it decreased overall with similar (P > 0.05) values observed for the different lighting treatments. In Experiment 2, the mean position of the groups across the pen varied according to whether lighting was on the left or right, with groups displaced to the right when the lights were on the left, and standing in the middle of the pen when the lights were on the right (P < 0.05). During testing, groups moved away from whichever side the lights were on (P < 0.05). The experiments suggested that stress during restraint was reduced by providing darkness and that deer preferred dim lighting compared with bright lighting when confined in unfamiliar surroundings.