publication . Preprint . Report . 2009

Default, Framing and Spillover Effects: The Case of Lifecycle Funds in 401(k) Plans

Olivia Mitchell; Gary Mottola; Stephen Utkus; Takeshi Yamaguchi;

Open Access

Published: 01 Jun 2009

Summary
references
21

Abstract

Important behavioral factors such as default and framing effects are increasingly being employed to optimize decision-making in a variety of settings, including individually-directed retirement plans. Yet such approaches may have unintended "spillover" effects, as we show with regard to the introduction of lifecycle funds in U.S. 401(k) plans. As anticipated, lifecycle funds do reshape individual portfolio choices through large default and framing effects. But unexpectedly, they also create a new class of investors which holds these funds as part of more complex portfolios. Our results are directly relevant to those interested in retirement plan design and retir...

doi: 10.3386/w15108

Subjects

free text keywords: jel:G11, jel:G2, jel:G23, jel:H3, jel:H55, jel:J14, jel:J26

Download fromView all 2 versions

Research Papers in Economics

Preprint . 2009

Provider: Research Papers in Economics

https://doi.org/10.3386/w15108...

Report

Provider: UnpayWall

http://dx.doi.org/10.3386/w151...

Report . 2010

Provider: Crossref

21 references, page 1 of 2

Agnew, Julie, Pierluigi Balduzzi, and Annika Sunden. 2003. “Portfolio Choice and Trading in a Large 401(k) Plan,” American Economic Review, 93(1): 193-215. [OpenAIRE]

Ameriks, John and Stephen Zeldes. 2001. “How Do Household Portfolio Shares Vary with Age?” TIAA-CREF Institute Working Paper 6-120101.Working Paper.

Benartzi, Shlomo. 2001. “Excessive Extrapolation and the Allocation of 401(k) Accounts to Company Stock.” Journal of Finance. October. 56(5). 1747-1764. [OpenAIRE]

Benartzi, Shlomo and Richard H. Thaler. 2001. “Naïve Diversification Strategies in Defined Contribution Savings Plans.” American Economic Review. March. 91(1): 79-98.

Benartzi, Shlomo and Richard H. Thaler. 2002. "How Much Is Investor Autonomy Worth?" Journal of Finance. August. 57(4): 1593-1616.

Benartzi, Shlomo, Ehud Peleg, and Richard H. Thaler. 2007. "Choice Architecture and Retirement Savings Plans.” Working paper. http://ssrn.com/abstract=999420.

Calvet, Laurent E., John Y. Campbell, and Paolo Sodini. 2009. “Fight or Flight? Portfolio Rebalancing by Individual Investors.” Quarterly Journal of Economics. 124: 301-348.

Choi, James J., David Laibson, Brigitte C. Madrian, and Andrew Metrick. 2003. "Optimal Defaults." American Economic Review. 93:180-185.

Choi, James J., David Laibson, and Brigitte C. Madrian. 2004. "Plan Design and 401(k) Savings Outcomes." National Tax Journal. 57:275-298.

Choi, James J., David Laibson, Brigitte C. Madrian, and Andrew Metrick. 2006. “Saving for Retirement on the Path of Least Resistance.” Ed McCaffrey and Joel Slemrods, eds., Behavioral Public Finance: Toward a New Agenda. 304-351.

Huberman, Gur and Wei Jiang. 2006. “Offering vs. Choices in 401(k) Plans: Equity Exposure and Number of Funds.” Journal of Finance. XLI(2): 763-801.

Iyengar, Sheena, Gur Huberman and Wei Jiang. 2004. “How Much Choice is Too Much? Contributions to 401(k) Retirement Plans.” In Pension Design and Structure: New Lessons from Behavioral Finance, Olivia S. Mitchell and Stephen P. Utkus, eds. Oxford: Oxford University Press: 83-96. [OpenAIRE]

Iyengar, Sheena, and Wei Jiang. 2006. “The Psychological Costs of Ever Increasing Choice: A Fallback to the Sure Bet.” Working paper.

Lusardi, Annamaria and Olivia S. Mitchell. 2007. “Baby Boomer Retirement Security: The Role of Planning, Financial Literacy and Housing Health. Journal of Monetary Economics. 54(1) January: 205-224.

Madrian, Brigitte, and D.F. Shea. 2001. “The Power of Suggestion: Inertia in 401(k) Participation and Savings Behavior.” Quarterly Journal of Economics 116: 1149-1525. [OpenAIRE]

21 references, page 1 of 2

Any information missing or wrong?Report an Issue