Research
Publication
"Individualism-Collectivism and Risk Perception around the World" (with Songfa Zhong), forthcoming at Management Science, 2025.
Presented at NUS AESW, 2022 Virtual AP-ESA Meeting Osaka, NUS BEE, NUS Global Research Forum 2021*.
Understanding cultural differences in risk perception is critical in an increasingly uncertain world. Here we examine the relationship between the individualism-collectivism continuum and risk perception around the world using a recently available dataset from the Lloyd’s Register Foundation World Risk Poll. The dataset contains rich information of a representative sample of 150,000 participants from 142 countries, and investigates risk perception in terms of perceived likelihood and personal experiences for a range of risks in daily life. We observe that participants from countries with a more individualistic culture perceive lower risk after controlling their personal experiences. We observe similar patterns when we adopt an epidemiological approach to investigate the individualistic cultural influence of first- and second-generation immigrants and use historical kinship tightness to proxy for individualism. Our study sheds light on the importance of culture in shaping risk perception and contributes to understanding global differences in behavioral traits.
Working Paper
"Better and Faster Decisions with Recommendation Algorithms" (with Yiting Chen and Songfa Zhong).
Presented at INFORMS 2024, Nanyang Technological University, BUE-EBEL 3rd Annual International Conference in Behavioural & Experimental Economics, 2023 AMES Singapore, 2023 AMES Beijing, 2022 North-American ESA Conference (Choice Process Data Workshop), D-TEA 2024*, HKUST*, NYU Abu Dhabi*, Peking University*, Tsinghua University*, Renmin University of China*, Wuhan University*, Xiamen University*.
While recommendation algorithms are increasingly powerful and prevalent, their influences on individual decision-making remain largely unexplored. To address this question, we conduct a randomized controlled experiment where subjects of a US representative sample make risky decisions. Subjects receive no recommendations in one baseline condition and random recommendations in another baseline condition. In three treatment conditions, subjects receive recommendations based on decisions of the majority, their own past decisions, or decisions of similar subjects. Compared with baseline conditions, subjects tend to follow recommendations and they exhibit less stochastic choices, behave more consistently with expected utility, and make faster decisions. Moreover, subjects are willing to pay to receive recommendations for subsequent decisions. This study helps understand behavioral mechanisms underlying recommendation algorithms and sheds light on the design of choice architecture with the assistance of artificial intelligence.
* presented by a co-author