divine restraint: an experimental analysis of religious … · divine restraint: an experimental...
TRANSCRIPT
Divine Restraint: An experimental analysis of religious preference and intertemporal discounting
Jeremy Thornton, Brock School of Business - Samford University
Motivation
Theory
Experiment
Results
Conclusions
4/11/2015 2
“Having, First, gained all you can, and, Secondly saved all you can, Then give all you can.”
John Wesley, 1840Founder of the Methodist Church
Motivation
Theory
Experiment
Results
Conclusions
4/11/2015 3
A paradox. Does religious belief make you more prosperous?
Motivation
Theory
Experiment
Results
Conclusions
4/11/2015 4
Our question: Does religious belief promote delayed gratification?
Motivation
Theory
Experiment
Results
Conclusions
4/11/2015 5
What is time preference?
Motivation
Theory
Experiment
Results
Conclusions
4/11/2015 6
Why would we expect religion to influence time preference?
1. Religion can improve self-control (Paglieri F. Borghi, Colzato, Hommel, & Scorolli, 2013; McCullough & Willoughby, 2009)
2. Alter the relative value of material and social investments (Smith & Faris, 2005; Vaisey & Lizardo, 2010)
3. Develop skills to lower the cost of investment (Regnerus, 2003)
Motivation
Theory
Experiment
Results
Conclusions
4/11/2015 7
Some other studies on religion and time preference:
Religious households consider themselves more trusting, stronger bequest motives, and longer planning horizons. Oxford Economic Papers (Renneboog & Spaenjers, 2011)
Christian religions are positively associated with attitudes conducive to economic growth Journal of Monetary Economics (Guiso et. al., 2003)
The impact of religion on time preference varies by religious tradition. These differences were attributable to religious upbringing rather than cultural or genetic differences. Psychological Research Paglieri et. al. (2013)
Motivation
Theory
Experiment
Results
Conclusions
4/11/2015 8
This paper contributes to the literature in the following ways:
1. We randomly apply religious salience through the use of a “prime”. <More on this later>
2. The study uses monetary payoffs (along with hypotheticals) to elicit discount rates from test subjects.
3. Using the relatively new online platform, Mechanical Turk, we are able to construct a large and diverse sample– relative to previous studies.
Motivation
Theory
Experiment
Results
Conclusions
4/11/2015 9
How can you test time preference?
Motivation
Theory
Experiment
Results
Conclusions
4/11/2015 10
How do we get our sample?
Motivation
Theory
Experiment
Results
Conclusions
4/11/2015 11
Sample: n=1000Each subject is paid $.50 with an opportunity for increased payments.
Motivation
Theory
Experiment
Results
Conclusions
4/11/2015 12
Motivation
Theory
Experiment
Results
Conclusions
4/11/2015 13
What about those primes?
Motivation
Theory
Experiment
Results
Conclusions
4/11/2015 14
Religious Prime
n=500
Experiment
With Pay MCQ
No Pay MCQ
Hypothetical MCQ
Control Prime
N=500
Experiment
With Pay MCQ
No Pay MCQ
Hypothetical MCQ
Survey Flow
Rep
eat
qu
esti
on
nai
re w
ith
o
pp
osi
te p
rim
e
De
mo
gra
ph
ic Q
ues
tio
ns
Motivation
Theory
Experiment
Results
Conclusions
4/11/2015 15
Treatments Freq.
Prime Prime
Experimental w/pay 150 147
Religion Control
Experimental w/pay 150 146
Control Religion
Hypothetical 155 154
Religion Control
Hypothetical 160 160
Control Religion
Experimental w/o pay 156 154
Religion Control
Experimental w/o pay 183 185
Control Religion Total
954 946 1900
Motivation
Theory
Experiment
Results
Conclusions
4/11/2015 16
Religious Preference Freq. Percent
Agnostic 186 19.02
Protestant 174 17.79
Atheist 173 17.69
Catholic 163 16.67
Other Christian 146 14.93
Other 65 6.65
Jewish 19 1.94
Buddhist 16 1.64
Mormon 13 1.33
Hindu 9 0.92
Muslim 9 0.92
Orthodox 3 0.31
Sikh 2 0.2
Total 978 100
4/11/2015 17
0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200
Agnostic
Protestant
Atheist
Catholic
Other Christian
Other
Jewish
Buddhist
Mormon
Hindu
Muslim
Orthodox
Sikh
Religious Attendance
Never On Holidays Several x /Year Monthly 2-3x /Month 1x /week >1x /week
4/11/2015 18
0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200
Agnostic
Protestant
Atheist
Catholic
Other Christian
Other
Jewish
Buddhist
Mormon
Hindu
Muslim
Orthodox
Sikh
Religious Importance
Not Important Very Unimportant Somewhat Unimportant Somewhat Important Very Important Extremely Important
Motivation
Theory
Experiment
Results
Conclusions
4/11/2015 19
Sex
Education Male Female Total
Some HS 9 6 15
HS 79 101 180
Some College 299 315 614
College 362 445 807
Graduate School 127 157 284
Total 876 1,024 1,900
4/11/2015 20
Religious
Preference
Mean
K SD k
Buddhist 0.23 0.40
Hindu 0.21 0.38
Other Christian 0.19 0.35
Jewish 0.17 0.30
Catholic 0.17 0.33
Other 0.16 0.32
Agnostic 0.14 0.30
Atheist 0.12 0.27
Mormon 0.11 0.27
Protestant 0.10 0.24
Sikh 0.09 0.10
Muslim 0.09 0.09
Orthodox 0.03 0.02
0 .05 .1 .15 .2 .25mean of k
Orthodox
Muslim
Sikh
Protestant
Mormon
Atheist
Agnostic
Other
Catholic
Jewish
Other Christian
Hindu
Buddhist
Discount Rates by Religious Preference
Motivation
Theory
Experiment
Results
Conclusions
4/11/2015 21
0.1
.2.3
.4.5
Fra
ctio
n
0 .2 .4 .6 .8 1k
Motivation
Theory
Experiment
Results
Conclusions
4/11/2015 22
0
.05
.1
Fra
ctio
n
0 5 10 15abs_lkhat
Motivation
Theory
Experiment
Results
Conclusions
4/11/2015 23
12
34
56
Lin
ea
r P
redic
tion
abs_
lkh
at
Bu
dd
his
t
Ca
tho
lic
Hin
du
Jew
ish
Morm
on
Muslim
Ort
ho
do
x
Pro
testa
nt
Sik
h
Ag
no
stic
Ath
eis
t
Oth
er
Oth
er
Chri
stian
Adjusted Predictions of reg_pref with 95% CIs
Motivation
Theory
Experiment
Results
Conclusions
4/11/2015 24
02
46
8
Lin
ea
r P
redic
tion
abs_
lkh
at
Bu
dd
his
t
Ca
tho
lic
Hin
du
Jew
ish
Morm
on
Muslim
Ort
ho
do
x
Pro
testa
nt
Sik
h
Ag
no
stic
Ath
eis
t
Oth
er
Oth
er
Chri
stian
relig_attend_yes=0 relig_attend_yes=1
abs_lkhat by religious preference and religious attendance
Motivation
Theory
Experiment
Results
Conclusions
4/11/2015 25
-50
51
0
Lin
ea
r P
redic
tion
abs_
lkh
at
Bu
dd
his
t
Ca
tho
lic
Hin
du
Jew
ish
Morm
on
Muslim
Ort
ho
do
x
Pro
testa
nt
Sik
h
Ag
no
stic
Ath
eis
t
Oth
er
Oth
er
Chri
stian
relig_importance_yes=0 relig_importance_yes=1
abs_lkhat by Religious Preference and Importance
Motivation
Theory
Experiment
Results
Conclusions
4/11/2015 26
02
46
Lin
ea
r P
redic
tion
abs_
lkh
at
Bu
dd
his
t
Ca
tho
lic
Hin
du
Jew
ish
Morm
on
Muslim
Ort
ho
do
x
Pro
testa
nt
Sik
h
Ag
no
stic
Ath
eis
t
Oth
er
Oth
er
Chri
stian
overall_treat=0 overall_treat=1
Margins over Religious Preference and Religious Treatment
Motivation
Theory
Experiment
Results
Conclusions
4/11/2015 27
02
46
8
Lin
ea
r P
redic
tion
abs_
lkh
at
Bu
dd
his
t
Ca
tho
lic
Hin
du
Jew
ish
Morm
on
Muslim
Ort
ho
do
x
Pro
testa
nt
Sik
h
Ag
no
stic
Oth
er
Oth
er
Chri
stian
overall_treat=0 overall_treat=1
Treatment Effects over Religious Preference if Religious Attendence = High
Motivation
Theory
Experiment
Results
Conclusions
4/11/2015 28
05
10
Lin
ea
r P
redic
tion
abs_
lkh
at
Bu
dd
his
t
Ca
tho
lic
Hin
du
Jew
ish
Morm
on
Muslim
Ort
ho
do
x
Pro
testa
nt
Sik
h
Ag
no
stic
Ath
eis
t
Oth
er
Oth
er
Chri
stian
overall_treat=0 overall_treat=1
Treatment Effects over Religious Preference if Religious Importance = High
Motivation
Theory
Experiment
Results
Conclusions
4/11/2015 29
Conclusions:
• There is strong support in the literature that religious belief should be positively associated with increased self control.
• Other papers (which rely on surveys or smaller samples) have found relatively modest confirmation of this hypothesis.
• Our approach (with larger samples and an experimental payoff design) found no impact on religious belief on subjects discount rates.
4/11/2015 30
Jeremy Thornton
Dwight Moody Beeson Chair of BusinessAssociate Professor of Economics
Brock School of BusinessSamford University