How Do Consumers Respond When Default Options Push the Envelope?
How Do Consumers Respond When Default Options Push the Envelope?
7 July, 2020 •Similar Articles
Cheap promises: Evidence from loan repayment pledges in an online experiment
Across domains, people struggle to follow through on their commitments. This can happen for many reasons, including dishonesty, forgetfulness, or i...
Repayment Flexibility in Microfinance Contracts: Theory and Experimental Evidence on Take-Up and Selection
This paper studies the impact of introducing repayment flexibility in microfinance contracts. I build an adverse selection model that predicts the ...
A personal touch in text messaging can improve microloan repayment
Because payment delays and defaults significantly affect both lenders and borrowers in fragile economies, strategies to improve timely loan repayme...
Many employers have increased the default contribution rates in their retirement plans, generating higher employee savings. However, a large fraction of employers are reluctant to default employees into savings rates that are high enough to leave those employees adequately prepared for retirement without supplementary savings. There are two potential concerns regarding a high default: (i) it may drag an employee along to a high contribution rate even when this outcome is not in the employee’s best interest, and (ii) perhaps more importantly, it may cause an employee to opt out of plan participation entirely. We conducted a field experiment with 10,000 employees who visited a website that facilitated savings plan enrollment. They were randomly assigned to see a default contribution rate ranging from 6% (a typical default) to 11%. Relative to the 6% default, higher defaults increased average contribution rates 60 days after a website visit by 20-50 basis points of pay off of a base of 6.11% of pay. We find little evidence that the concerns with high defaults are warranted, although the highest default (11%) increases the likelihood of not participating by 3.7 percentage points. The evidence suggests that erring on the high side when choosing a default contribution rate is less likely to generate unintended consequences than erring on the low side.