The hidden cost of insurance on cooperation

Published on Dec 1, 2017in Journal of Behavioral Decision Making
· DOI :10.1002/bdm.2033
Ppfm Philippe van de Calseyde2
Estimated H-index: 2
(TU/e: Eindhoven University of Technology),
Gideon Keren24
Estimated H-index: 24
(Tilburg University),
Marcel Zeelenberg55
Estimated H-index: 55
(Tilburg University)
A common solution to mitigate risk is to buy insurance. Employing the trust game, we find that buying insurance against the risk of betrayal has a hidden cost: trustees are more likely to act opportunistically when trustors choose to be insured against the breach of trust. Supposedly, trustees are less likely to cooperate when trustors buy insurance because choosing insurance implicitly signals that the trustor expects the trustee to behave opportunistically, paradoxically encouraging trustees not to cooperate. These results shed new light on the potential drawbacks of financial safeguards that are intended to minimize the risky nature of trust taking: the presumed safeguard against the risk of betrayal may, under certain circumstances, increase the probability of betrayal.
  • References (31)
  • Citations (3)
📖 Papers frequently viewed together
1 Author (Vinton G. Cerf)
78% of Scinapse members use related papers. After signing in, all features are FREE.
#1Anthony M. Evans (Tilburg University)H-Index: 12
#2Philippe P.F.M. van de Calseyde (TU/e: Eindhoven University of Technology)H-Index: 2
The present research investigates how people use observed decision time to form expectations of others' behavior in social dilemmas. In four studies, participants received information about others' decision times (fast or slow) and were asked to estimate how much they contributed to a common pool. People believe fast decisions are more extreme than slow decisions; in other words, they assume that fast decisions are either extremely selfish or extremely cooperative. People also believe that fast ...
11 CitationsSource
#1Jillian J. Jordan (Yale University)H-Index: 9
#2Moshe Hoffman (Harvard University)H-Index: 12
Last. David G. Rand (Yale University)H-Index: 49
view all 4 authors...
Humans frequently cooperate without carefully weighing the costs and benefits. As a result, people may wind up cooperating when it is not worthwhile to do so. Why risk making costly mistakes? Here, we present experimental evidence that reputation concerns provide an answer: people cooperate in an uncalculating way to signal their trustworthiness to observers. We present two economic game experiments in which uncalculating versus calculating decision-making is operationalized by either a subject’...
42 CitationsSource
#1Rudolf Kerschbamer (University of Innsbruck)H-Index: 20
#2Daniel Neururer (University of Innsbruck)H-Index: 4
Last. Matthias Sutter (MPG: Max Planck Society)H-Index: 53
view all 3 authors...
Honesty is a fundamental pillar for cooperation in human societies and thus for their economic welfare. However, humans do not always act in an honest way. Here, we examine how insurance coverage affects the degree of honesty in credence goods markets. Such markets are plagued by strong incentives for fraudulent behavior of sellers, resulting in estimated annual costs of billions of dollars to customers and the society as a whole. Prime examples of credence goods are all kinds of repair services...
10 CitationsSource
#1Tim Gamble (University of Bath)H-Index: 5
#2Ian Walker (University of Bath)H-Index: 21
Humans adapt their risk-taking behavior on the basis of perceptions of safety; this risk-compensation phenomenon is typified by people taking increased risks when using protective equipment. Existing studies have looked at people who know they are using safety equipment and have specifically focused on changes in behaviors for which that equipment might reduce risk. Here, we demonstrated that risk taking increases in people who are not explicitly aware they are wearing protective equipment; furt...
21 CitationsSource
#1Luis F. Martinez (NSU: Nova Southeastern University)H-Index: 11
#2Marcel ZeelenbergH-Index: 55
Emotional states exert an influence on trust and the reciprocation of trust. The current research found that regret and disappointment, though both negatively valenced, have distinct effects on trust (and trustworthiness). Three experiments showed that regret decreased trust and trustworthiness, whereas disappointment increased them. Regret elicited both lower initial transfers and returns in a trust game. Conversely, disappointment gave rise to both higher initial transfers and returns in the s...
16 CitationsSource
#1Ppfm Philippe van de Calseyde (Tilburg University)H-Index: 2
#2Gideon Keren (Tilburg University)H-Index: 24
Last. Marcel Zeelenberg (Tilburg University)H-Index: 55
view all 3 authors...
People often observe others’ decisions and the corresponding time it took them to reach the decision. Following a signaling perspective, we demonstrate that people derive information from the time that others needed in reaching a decision. Specifically, the findings of multiple experiments and a field study using data from the television show The Voice reveal that decision times are perceived as indicative of the degree of doubt that the decision maker experienced. In turn, these inferences of d...
13 CitationsSource
#1David G. Rand (Yale University)H-Index: 49
#2Alexander Peysakhovich (Yale University)H-Index: 14
Last. Joshua D. Greene (Harvard University)H-Index: 32
view all 7 authors...
Cooperation is central to human societies. Yet relatively little is known about the cognitive underpinnings of cooperative decision making. Does cooperation require deliberate self-restraint? Or is spontaneous prosociality reined in by calculating self-interest? Here we present a theory of why (and for whom) intuition favors cooperation: cooperation is typically advantageous in everyday life, leading to the formation of generalized cooperative intuitions. Deliberation, by contrast, adjusts behav...
324 CitationsSource
#1Orit E. Tykocinski (Interdisciplinary Center Herzliya)H-Index: 14
When a threat looms large in people's minds, they may seek protective measures that could mitigate the negative outcomes associated with this threat. Paradoxically, the possession of such protective measures may, in turn, inspire a sense of safety and reduce the perceived probability of the very threat that had originally triggered their acquisition. Thus, reminding people that they possess a medical insurance policy attenuated their perceived risk of suffering from health related misfortunes (T...
5 Citations
#1Job van Wolferen (Tilburg University)H-Index: 2
#2Yoel InbarH-Index: 23
Last. Marcel ZeelenbergH-Index: 55
view all 3 authors...
In this paper we test two hypotheses regarding magical thinking about the perceived likelihood of future events. The first is that people believe that those who ``tempt fate'' by failing to take necessary precautions are more likely to suffer negative outcomes. The second is the ``protection effect'', where reminding people of precautions they have taken leads them to see related risks as less likely. To this end, we describe the results from three attempted direct replications of a protection e...
13 Citations
#1van de Ppfm Philippe Calseyde (TU/e: Eindhoven University of Technology)H-Index: 1
#2Gideon Keren (TU/e: Eindhoven University of Technology)H-Index: 24
Last. Marcel ZeelenbergH-Index: 55
view all 3 authors...
An insurance policy may not only affect the consequences for victims but also for perpetrators. In six experiments we find that people recommend milder punishments for perpetrators when the victim was insured, although people believe that a sentence should not depend on the victim’s insurance status. The robustness of this effect is demonstrated by showing that recommendations can even be more lenient for crimes that are in fact more serious but in which the victim was insured. Moreover, even wh...
8 Citations
Cited By3
#1Lan Xia (Bentley University)H-Index: 16
#2Anne L. Roggeveen (Babson College)H-Index: 65
Abstract Growing dynamic pricing and price automation trends increase the risk of price mistakes. In the case of low price mistakes, consumers might seek to take advantage of the error, and the company must decide whether to honor or deny the transactions. A set of studies reveal that consumers are more likely to take advantage of the price mistake when they feel powerful and when they perceive the company as powerful. Moreover, their perceptions of service fairness serve as double-edged swords,...
#1Tessa Haesevoets (UGent: Ghent University)H-Index: 5
#2Dries H. Bostyn (UGent: Ghent University)H-Index: 5
Last. Alain Van Hiel (UGent: Ghent University)H-Index: 35
view all 5 authors...
The prisoner's dilemma game is a mixed-motive game that offers two players the simultaneous choice between a cooperative and a defective alternative. An often neglected aspect of such a binary-choice game, however, is that in many real-life encounters, people can choose not only to cooperate or defect, but they also have a third option: to exit the social dilemma. Although in the literature a consensus has emerged that the addition of an exit opportunity benefits cooperation, there is only scant...
1 CitationsSource
#1Mirko DuradoniH-Index: 4
#2Mario PaolucciH-Index: 16
Last. Andrea GuazziniH-Index: 10
view all 4 authors...
Reputation supports pro-social behaviors in a variety of social settings and across different ages. When re-encounters are possible, developing a positive reputation can be a valuable asset that will result in better outcomes. However, in real life, cooperative acts are ambiguous and happen in noisy environments in which individuals can have multiple goals, visibility is reduced, and reputation systems may differ. This study examined how reputation within a virtual environment affects fairness i...
4 CitationsSource
#1Anthony M. Evans (Tilburg University)H-Index: 12
#2Philippe P.F.M. van de Calseyde (TU/e: Eindhoven University of Technology)H-Index: 2
The present research examines the reputational consequences of generalized trust. High-trust individuals are seen as moral and sociable, but not necessarily competent. When controlling for other traits, there is a negative relationship between trust and perceived competence (Studies 1 and 2). Compared with optimism, generalized trust has stronger effects on morality and sociability (Study 2). Furthermore, people judge those who do not discriminate between trustworthy and untrustworthy groups (un...
2 CitationsSource