時間偏好的類型與其影響因素之探討
Patterns of Time Preference and its Influencing Factors
林舒予 明新科技大學企業管理系
摘 要
ABSTRACT
In intertemporal choice, most economists believe that a rational person should exhibits positive time preference. However, a great deal of behavior evidence suggests that most people exhibit negative time preference rather than positive time preference. While most of relevant researches focus on the comparison between positive and negative time preference, in the context of wage profile, this study provides seven preference patterns for subjects to choose. The main results show that (1) “Even distribution” is the most popular preference pattern. (2) Providing economist’s argument or other manipulation can only reduce the strength of “even distribution” preference, but not its direction. (3) Issue of “self-control” is the main reason for subjects to choose “even distribution.”(4) Two main characteristics of distributions (Evenness of spread, direction of changes) influence people’s time preference, however, their relative importance hinge on the sign of the utility.
1. 緒論
人們表現出「負時間偏好」的現象相當普遍。例如,Loewenstein 與 Sicherman(1991) 的實驗中發現在相同總金額的薪資(或租金收入)下,多數人傾向偏好薪資(租金)遞增 的領取方式(負時間偏好),而非薪資(租金)遞減的領取方式(正時間偏好)。
4. 實驗三
過去文獻中的時間偏好型態,都是在等同本實驗的「高均勻」狀況下得到的結果, 但在本實驗的兩種「低均勻」情況中,五種「金額變化」的類型卻沒有顯著之差 異。 另一方面,在五種「金額變化」的情況下,「均勻度」的單純主要效果考驗均 達統計顯著性。隨後的LSD 檢定顯示,受訪者偏好「高均勻度」甚於兩種「低均 勻度」的情況,而「低均勻度1」與「低均勻度 2」間則沒有顯著差異。 最後,本研究也分析了「金額變化」與「均勻度」兩變項對受訪者偏好影響 的相對重要性,在受訪者的自省報告中,「金額變化」的相對重要性之平均數為 33.3%,「均勻度」的相對重要性之平均數為66.7%。在變異數分析當中,本研究採
用「淨 η(Partial Eta Squared)」作為關聯強度分析的指標(類似迴歸分析當中的
R2),結果顯示「金額變化」的「淨 η」值為 0.35,而「均勻度」的「淨 η」值
為0.6。這結果顯示,至少在薪資領取(正效用值)的情況下,受訪者的自省報告
與其行為資料是一致的。同時,這結果也顯示出,「均勻度」的重要性高於文獻上
6. 參考文獻
1. 林舒予、林舒慧、李俊儀、溫琬蓉、廖涵柔、徐慧穎(民 92 年)。時間偏好的類型 與其影響因素。2003 行為財務學暨法律與財務學研討會。台北:世新大學。
2. 黃意雯(2007),「財務收支之時間偏好分析」,明新科技大學,企業管理研究所
碩士學位論文。
3. Loewenstein, G. F. and Prelec, D.(1991). Negative time preference. American economic Review Proceedings, 81, 347-352.
4. Loewenstein, G. F. and Sicherman, N.(1991). Do workers prefer increasing wage profiles? Journal of Labor Economics, 9, 67-84.
5. Loewenstein, G. F. and Prelec, D. (1993),“Preferences for sequences of outcomes,” Psychological Review, 81, 347-352.
6. Shane Frederick , George Loewenstein and Ted O’Donoghue.(2002). Time Discounting: A Critical Review. Journal of economic literature, 40, 351-401.
7. Chapman, G. B. (1996),“Expectations and preferences for sequences of health and money,” Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 67, 59-75. 8. Schmitt, D. R. and Kemper, T. D. (1996) ,“Preference for different sequences of
increasing or decreasing rewards,” Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 66, 89-101.