Persuasion in Financial Decisions

现实世界的两个特征似乎在许多经济理论中被忽略了。一个是决策者往往是在别人的劝说下做出决定的。例如，投资者向经纪人寻求建议，经纪人试图说服他们选择某种股票或共同基金，而销售人员则试图说服人们购买一种产品而不是另一种产品。如果说服的对象是一项被定义为彩票而不是金钱奖励的投资，那么一个问题是，人们认为潜在投资的哪些特征有足够的说服力或说服力来引导他们选择它？换句话说，为了说服他或她的客户，经纪人可能会选择突出这些分配或彩票的哪些特征？他或她会强调赢得很多钱的可能性，还是会根据最不理想的结果来比较投资。他或她会关注方差还是投资的其他方面？其他问题也随之出现。不同类型的人是否觉得分布的不同特征更有说服力？如果是的话，在这种关系中哪些因素是重要的？与没有竞争的情况下所提供的建议类型相比，金融业的建议市场的竞争程度（即经纪公司之间的竞争）是否会改变提供给个人的建议类型？这种竞争是否会提高福利？提供建议与“经济家长式作风”（即，以你认为对个人最有利的方式为基础提出建议的动机）有何联系？它对福利有何影响？使用实验技术，我们将尝试回答这些问题和更多。实验方法为这样一个项目提供了许多优点。它将允许实验系统地改变环境的各个方面，例如竞争水平和决策者拥有的信息量，这些在实际投资市场中很难观察到。它还允许控制顾问可获得的建议，这在该领域是不可能的。更广泛的影响：本建议侧重于说服在个人决策问题。这项研究将增加人们对什么语言有说服力以及在什么情况下有说服力的理解。它还将确定投资者掌握的信息水平以及顾问之间的竞争程度如何影响所提供的建议。这有助于告知立法者，如果顾问需要什么类型的投资信息的话。它还可以揭示什么对投资者最有利：是增加竞争，还是增加信息。最后，它可以为投资顾问提供有关如何更好地告知客户的宝贵信息。

Two features of the real world seem missing in much of economic theory. One is the fact that decision makers often make their decisions after being persuaded to do so by someone else. For example, investors seek advice from brokers who try to persuade them to select a certain stock or mutual fund, while salesmen try to persuade people to buy one product rather than another. If the object of persuasion is an investment defined as a lottery over monetary prizes, one question is what features of a potential investment do people find persuasive or convincing enough to lead them to choose it? In other words, what features of these distributions or lotteries might the broker choose to highlight in order to persuade his or her client? Would he or she stress the possibility of winning a lot of money or would he or she compare the investments on the basis of their least desirable outcomes. Would he or she focus on the variance or on other aspects of the investments? Other questions also arise. Do different types of people find different features of distributions more persuasive, and if so, what factors are important in this relationship? Does the level of competition in advice markets in the financial industry (i.e., competition between brokerage houses) alters the type of advice that is offered to individuals, as compared to the type of advice that would be offered without such competition, and is such competition welfare enhancing? How is advice giving connected to "economic paternalism" (i.e., the motive to advise an individual on the basis of what you think is best for him or her) and what are its welfare implications? Using experimental techniques we will try to answer these questions and more.The experimental approach offers many advantages for such a project. It will allow the experiment to systematically vary aspects of the environment, such as the level of competition and the amount of information the decision maker has which are difficult to observe in actual investment markets. It also allows the control of the advice available to the adviser, something not possible in the field.Broader Impacts: This proposal focuses on persuasion in individual decision problems. This research will increase understanding of what language people find persuasive and in what circumstances. It will also establish how the level of information the investors have and how much competition there is amongst advisers affect the advice given. This can help to inform lawmakers on what types of information about investments should be required, if any, by advisors. It also can shed light on what is best for investors: increased competition, or increased information. Finally, it could provide valuable information to investment advisers about how to better inform their clients.