Theoretical studies suggest narrow framing underlies individuals' saving decisions. When narrow framing is applied to retirement savings decisions, narrow framers tend to make decisions about present consumption without considering future consumption, i.e., saving for consumption in retirement. Time preference for the present and narrow framers' preference to maintain the status quo lead to a decision that is less likely to increase savings for retirement. This study provides empirical evidence that narrow framing bias affects retirement savings decisions. Using a two‐part model, the probit estimation indicates narrow framers anticipated being less willing to increase retirement savings contributions compared to broad framers, and the OLS regression estimates that narrow framers anticipated contributing less than broad framers. Here, narrow framers anticipated being less willing to increase retirement savings (62.6% vs. 71.9%) and contributing less ($70.90 vs. $88.40) than broad framers, thus providing empirical evidence regarding the effects of behavioral biases on financial decisions.

The cost and prevalence of chronic health conditions increase in late life and can negatively impact accumulated wealth. Based on the financial challenges midaged and older adults face, we sought to understand the evolution of distinctive sequences of chronic health conditions and how these sequences affect retirement savings. We used 10 waves of the Health and Retirement Study and tracked the health states and changes in wealth of 5,540 individuals. We identified five typical sequences of chronic health conditions, which are defined as follows: Multimorbidity, Comorbidity, Mild Disease, Late Event, and No Disease. Wealth accumulation differed across the five sequences. Multimorbidity and Comorbidity were the most costly sequences. Individuals with these health patterns, respectively, had $91,205 and $95,140, less net worth than respondents identified with No Disease. Our findings suggest policy makers consider sequential disease patterns when planning for the health-care needs and expenditures of older Americans.

This study examined how two self-regulatory modes, locomotion and assessment, relate to the willingness to increase retirement savings. Locomotion is concerned with making things happen ("just do it"). Assessment is concerned with critical evaluation ("do the right thing"). We hypothesized that individuals who score high (vs. low) in locomotion, but not those who score high (vs. low) in assessment, would be more willing to increase their savings for retirement. In addition, because high (vs. low) assessment can lead to doing the right thing in terms of seeking to maximize economic returns, we hypothesized that combining high locomotion with high assessment would especially motivate willingness to increase retirement savings. We found support for both hypotheses from a survey of university employees.

No abstract

No abstract