Vaccine hunters and jostlers may have hurt the COVID-19 vaccination effort.

We examine how salience of extreme actions to gain access to vaccines affect general vaccine preferences using a survey experiment conducted shortly after a limited supply of COVID-19 vaccines were made available to prioritized groups. We document that learning about people who jump the line (jostlers) or people who go through great lengths to secure left-over vaccine doses (hunters) is off-putting, and has a meaningful, negative effect on people's vaccine preferences. Most people, however, predict the opposite-that news about extreme behavior would help the vaccination effort. If policy makers or public health authorities share these incorrect beliefs, they run the risk of implementing information policies that backfire in their effort to signal desirability of the vaccine.

The impact of stress on tournament entry.

Individual willingness to enter competitive environments predicts career choices and labor market outcomes. Meanwhile, many people experience competitive contexts as stressful. We use two laboratory experiments to investigate whether factors related to stress can help explain individual differences in tournament entry. Experiment 1 studies whether stress responses (measured as salivary cortisol) to taking part in a mandatory tournament predict individual willingness to participate in a voluntary tournament. We find that competing increases stress levels. This cortisol response does not predict tournament entry for men but is positively and significantly correlated with choosing to enter the tournament for women. In Experiment 2, we exogenously induce physiological stress using the cold-pressor task. We find a positive causal effect of stress on tournament entry for women but no effect for men. Finally, we show that although the effect of stress on tournament entry differs between the genders, stress reactions cannot explain the well-documented gender difference in willingness to compete.

Cognitive ability and the demand for redistribution.

Empirical research suggests that the cognitively able are politically more influential than the less able, by being more likely to vote and to assume leadership positions. This study asks whether this pattern matters for public policy by investigating what role a person's cognitive ability plays in determining his preferences for redistribution of income among citizens in society. To answer this question, we use a unique Swedish data set that matches responses to a tailor-made questionnaire to administrative tax records and to military enlistment records for men, with the latter containing a measure of cognitive ability. On a scale of 0 to 100 percent redistribution, a one-standard-deviation increase in cognitive ability reduces the willingness to redistribute by 5 percentage points, or by the same amount as a $35,000 increase in mean annual income. We find support for two channels mediating this economically strong and statistically significant relation. First, higher ability is associated with higher income. Second, ability is positively correlated with the view that economic success is the result of effort, rather than luck. Both these factors are, in turn, related to lower demand for redistribution.

Salivary testosterone change following monetary wins and losses predicts future financial risk-taking.

While baseline testosterone has recently been implicated in risk-taking in men, less is known about the effects of changing levels of testosterone on financial risk. Here we attempt to influence testosterone in men by having them win or lose money in a chance-based competition against another male opponent. We employ two treatments where we vary the amount of money at stake so that we can directly compare winners to losers who earn the same amount, thereby abstracting from income effects. We find that men who experience a greater increase in bioactive testosterone take on more risk, an association that remains when controlling for whether the participant won the competition. In fact, whether subjects won the competition did not predict future risk. These results suggest that testosterone change, and thus individual differences in testosterone reactivity, rather than the act of winning or losing, influence financial risk-taking.

CAPITAL FLOWS, CONSUMPTION BOOMS AND ASSET BUBBLES: A BEHAVIOURAL ALTERNATIVE TO THE SAVINGS GLUT HYPOTHESIS.

Bernanke (2005) hypothesized that a "global savings glut" was causing large trade imbalances. However, we show that the global savings rates did not show a robust upward trend during the relevant period. Moreover, if there had been a global savings glut there should have been a large investment boom in the countries that imported capital. Instead, those countries experienced consumption booms. National asset bubbles explain the international imbalances. The bubbles raised consumption, resulting in large trade deficits. In a sample of 18 OECD countries plus China, movements in home prices alone explain half of the variation in trade deficits.