Does the number of funds offered in a defined contribution plan affect how many funds consumers choose to invest in or how they spread dollars across the funds they choose? Across three experiments and the analysis of defined contribution plan data, the authors explore these issues by examining investors' tendency to engage in the 1/n heuristic— that is, allocating their dollars evenly across all available investment options. The authors decompose this heuristic into its two underlying behavioral dimensions: the tendency to invest in all available funds (which they label “1/n#”) and the tendency to spread the invested dollars evenly across chosen funds (which they label “1/n$”). The authors argue that choosing from larger fund assortments taxes investors' cognitive resources, which leads to more simplified diversification strategies. They find that increasing the fund assortment size decreases the tendency to invest in all available funds (1/n#) but increases the tendency to spread the invested dollars evenly among the chosen alternatives (1/n$), provided that the number of funds chosen for investment allows for easy equal dollar allocations. The authors integrate their results with prior research regarding asset choice and allocation heuristics.
AyalShahar, and ZakayDan (2009), “The Perceived Diversity Heuristic: The Case of Pseudodiversity,”Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 96 (3), 559–73.
2.
BaumolWilliam J., and EdwardA. Ide (1956), “Variety in Retailing,”Management Science, 3 (1), 93–101.
3.
BenartziShlomo, and RichardH. Thaler (2001), “Naive Diversification Strategies in Defined Contribution Plans,”The American Economic Review, 91 (1), 79–98.
4.
BroniarczykSusan M. (2008), “Product Assortment,” in Handbook of Consumer Psychology, CurtP. Haugtvedt, PaulM. Herr, and FrankR. Kardes, eds. New York: Taylor & Francis, 755–79.
5.
ChaikenShelly, and TropeYaacov (1999), Dual-Process Theories in Social Psychology.New York: Guilford Press.
6.
ChalmersJohn, and ReuterJonathan (2012a), “How Do Retirees Value Life Annuities? Evidence from Public Employees,”Review of Financial Studies, forthcoming.
7.
ChalmersJohn, and ReuterJonathan (2012b), “What Is the Impact of Financial Advisors on Retirement Portfolio Choices and Outcomes?” working paper, Lundquist College of Business, University of Oregon.
8.
ChernevAlexander (2003), “When More Is Less and Less Is More: The Role of Ideal Point Availability and Assortment in Consumer Choice,”Journal of Consumer Research, 30 (September), 170–83.
9.
DharRavi, and ZhuNing (2006), “Up Close and Personal: Investor Sophistication and the Disposition Effect,”Management Science, 52 (5), 726–40.
10.
De NeysWim (2006), “Dual Processing in Reasoning—Two Systems but One Reasoner,”Psychological Science, 17 (5), 428–33.
11.
DeStenoDavid, MonicaY. Bartlett, BravermanJulia, and SaloveyPeter (2002), “Sex Differences in Jealousy: Evolutionary Mechanism or Artifact of Measurement?”Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 83 (5), 1103–1116.
12.
EltonEdwin J., MartinJ. Gruber, and BlakeChristopher (2006), “The Adequacy of Investment Choices Offered by 401K Plans,”Journal of Public Economics, 19 (6/7), 1299–1314.
13.
EpleyNicholas, and GilovichThomas (2006), “The Anchoring-and-Adjustment Heuristic,”Psychological Science, 17 (4), 311–18.
14.
EstreicherSamuel, and GoldLaurence (2007), “The Shift from Defined Benefit Plans to Defined Contribution Plans,”Lewis and Clark Law Review, 11, 331–39.
15.
EvansJonathan St. B.T. (2006), “The Heuristic-Analytic Theory of Reasoning: Extension and Evaluation,”Psychonomic Bulletin and Review, 13 (3), 378–95.
16.
EvansJonathan St. B.T. (2008), “Dual-Processing Accounts of Reasoning, Judgment and Social Cognition,”Annual Review of Psychology, 59, 255–78.
17.
EvansJonathan St. B.T., and Curtis-HolmesJodie (2005), “Rapid Responding Increases Belief Bias: Evidence for the Dual-Process Theory of Reasoning,”Thinking and Reasoning, 11 (4), 382–89.
18.
FennisBob M., JanssenLoes, and KathleenD. Vohs (2008), “Acts of Benevolence: A Limited-Resource Account of Compliance with Charitable Requests,”Journal of Consumer Research, 35 (April), 906–924.
19.
FoxCraig R., RebeccaK. Ratner, and DanielS. Lieb (2005), “How Subjective Grouping of Options Influences Choice and Allocation: Diversification Bias and the Phenomenon of Partition Dependences,”Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 134 (4), 538–51.
20.
GilbertDaniel T., BrettW. Pelham, and DouglasS. Krull (1988), “On Cognitive Busyness: When Person Perceivers Meet Persons Perceived,”Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 54 (5), 733–40.
21.
GourvilleJohn, and SomanDilip (2005), “Overchoice and Assortment Type: When and Why Variety Backfires,”Marketing Science, 24 (3), 382–95.
22.
HedesstromTed Martin, SvedsaterHenrik, and GarlingTommy (2004), “Identifying Heuristic Choice Rules in the Swedish Premium Pension Scheme,”Journal of Behavioral Finance, 5 (1), 32–42.
23.
HubermanGur, SheenaS. Iyengar, and JiangWei (2007), “Defined Contribution Pension Plans: Determinants of Participation and Contributions Rates,”Journal of Financial Services Research, 31 (1), 1–32.
24.
HubermanGur, and JiangWei (2006), “Offering vs. Choice in 401(k) Plans: Equity Exposure and Number of Funds,”Journal of Finance, 61 (2), 763–801.
25.
HuffmanCynthia, and BarbaraE. Kahn (1998), “Variety for Sale: Mass Customization or Mass Confusion,”Journal of Retailing, 74 (4), 491–513.
26.
IyengarSheena S., and MarkR. Lepper (2000), “When Choice Is Demotivating: Can One Desire Too Much of a Good Thing?”Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 79 (6), 995–1006.
27.
KahnBarbara E., and DonaldR. Lehmann (1991), “Modeling Choice Among Assortments,”Journal of Retailing, 67 (3), 274–99.
28.
KahnemanDaniel, and FrederickShane (2005), “A Model of Heuristic Judgment,” in The Cambridge Handbook of Thinking and Reasoning, HolyoakK. Morrison, ed. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 267–94.
29.
KleinbaumDavid G., LawrenceL. Kupper, KeithE. Muller, and NizamAzhar (1998), Applied Regression Analysis and Other Multivariable Methods, 3d ed.Pacific Grove, CA: Duxbury Press.
30.
KumarAlok, and LimSonya Seongyeon (2008), “How Do Decision Frames Influence the Stock Investment Choices of Individual Investors?”Management Science, 54 (6), 1052–1064.
31.
LeeHyun-Jung, ParkJongwon, LeeJin-Yong, and RobertS. Wyer (2008), “Disposition Effects and Underlying Mechanisms in E-Trading of Stocks,”Journal of Marketing Research, 45 (June), 362–78.
32.
LevavJonathan, KivetzRan, and ChoCecile (2010), “Motivational Compatibility and Choice Conflict,”Journal of Consumer Research, 37 (October), 429–42.
33.
MadrianBrigitte C., and DennisF. Shea (2001), “The Power of Suggestion: Inertia in 401(k) Participation and Savings Behavior,”Quarterly Journal of Economics, 116 (4), 1149–87.
34.
MarkowitzHarry M. (1952), “Portfolio Selection,”Journal of Finance, 7 (1), 77–91.
35.
MeulbroekLisa (2005), “Company Stock in Pension Plans: How Costly Is It?”Journal of Law and Economics, 48 (October), 443–74.
36.
MickDavid Glen, SusanM. Broniarczyk, and HaidtJonathan (2004), “Choose, Choose, Choose, Choose, Choose, Choose, Choose: Emerging and Prospective Research on the Deleterious Effects of Living in Consumer Hyperchoice,”Journal of Business Ethics, 52 (52), 207–211.
37.
MitchellDeborah J., BarbaraE. Kahn, and SusanC. Knasko (1995), “There's Something in the Air: Effects of Congruent or Incongruent Ambient Odor on Consumer Decision Making,”Journal of Consumer Research, 22 (September), 229–38.
38.
MogilnerCassie, RudnickTamar, and SheenaS. Iyengar (2008), “The Mere Categorization Effect: How the Presence of Categories Increases Choosers' Perceptions of Assortment Variety and Outcome Satisfaction,”Journal of Consumer Research, 35 (August), 202–215.
39.
MorgensonGretchen (2003), “Lopsided 401(k)s, All Too Common,”The New York Times, (October 5), 3–1.
40.
NenkovGergana Y., InmanJ. Jeffrey, HullandJohn, and MorrinMaureen (2009), “The Impact of Outcome Elaboration on Susceptibility to Contextual and Presentation Biases,”Journal of Marketing Research, 46 (December), 764–76.
41.
NormanDonald A., and DanielG. Bobrow (1975), “On Data-Limited and Resource-Limited Processes,”Cognitive Psychology, 7 (1), 44–64.
42.
PocheptsovaAnastasiya, AmirOn, DharRavi, and BaumeisterRoy (2009), “Deciding Without Resources: Psychological Depletion and Choice in Context,”Journal of Marketing Research, 46 (June), 344–55.
43.
PrelecDrazen, and LoewensteinGeorge (1998), “The Red and the Black: Mental Accounting of Savings and Debt,”Marketing Science, 17 (1), 4–28.
44.
PrelecDrazen, and SimesterDuncan (2001), “Always Leave Home Without It: A Research Note,”Marketing Letters, 12 (1), 5–12.
45.
RosatoDonna (2003), “New 401(k) Tool, but Who Needs It?”The New York Times, (February 2), BU9.
46.
SamuelsonWilliam, and RichardJ. Zeckhauser (1988), “Status Quo Bias in Decision Making,”Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, 1 (March), 7–59.
47.
SchmeichelBrandon J., and RoyF. Baumeister (2004), “Self-Regulatory Strength,” in Handbook of Self-Regulation: Research, Theory, and Applications, RoyF. Baumeister, and KathleenD. Vohs, eds. New York: Guilford Press, 84–99.
48.
SchwartzBarry (2004), The Paradox of Choice.New York: HarperCollins.
49.
ShahAnuj K., and DanielM. Oppenheimer (2008), “Heuristics Made Easy: An Effort-Reduction Framework,”Psychological Bulletin, 134 (2), 207–22.
50.
ShefrinHersch, and StatmanMeir (1985), “The Disposition to Sell Winners Too Early and Ride Losers Too Long: Theory and Evidence,”Journal of Finance, 40 (3), 777–90.
51.
ShivBaba, and FedorikhinAlexander (1999), “Heart and Mind in Conflict: The Interplay of Affect and Cognition in Consumer Decision Making,”Journal of Consumer Research, 26 (December), 278–92.
52.
SomanDilip (2001), “Effects of Payment Mechanism on Spending Behavior: The Role of Rehearsal and Immediacy of Payments,”Journal of Consumer Research, 27 (March), 460–74.
53.
SomanDilip, and CheemaAmar (2002), “The Effect of Credit on Spending Decisions: The Role of the Credit Limit and Credibility,”Marketing Science, 21 (1), 32–53.
54.
StatmanMeir (2004), “The Diversification Puzzle,”Financial Analysts Journal, 60 (4), 44–53.
55.
ThalerRichard H., and BenartziShlomo (2004), “Save More Tomorrow™: Using Behavioral Economics to Increase Employee Saving,”Journal of Political Economy, 112 (1, Part 2), 164–87.
56.
VohsKathleen D., RoyF. Baumeister, BrandonJ. Schmeichel, JeanM. Twenge, NoelleM. Nelson, and DianneM. Tice (2008), “Making Choices Impairs Subsequent Self-Control: A Limited-Resource Account of Decision Making, Self-Regulation, and Active Initiative,”Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 94 (5), 883–98.
57.
WangPenelope (2004), “Need a Guru for Your 401(k)?”Money Magazine, (December), 61–62.
58.
ZhouRongrong, and PhamMichel Tuan (2004), “Promotion and Prevention Across Mental Accounts: When Financial Products Dictate Consumers' Investment Goals,”Journal of Consumer Research, 31 (June), 125–35.
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
