Abstract
We document an effect of survey participation on household saving. Identification comes from random assignment to modules within a population-representative Internet panel. The saving measure is based on linked administrative wealth data. Households that responded to a detailed questionnaire on needs in retirement reduced their non-housing saving rate by 3.5 percentage points, on a base of 1.5%. The survey may have acted as a salience shock, possibly with respect to reduced housing costs in retirement. Our findings present an important challenge to survey designers. They also add to the evidence of limited attention in household financial decision making.
Highlights
General rights Copyright and moral rights for the publications made accessible in the public portal are retained by the authors and/or other copyright owners and it is a condition of accessing publications that users recognise and abide by the legal requirements associated with these rights
Our article differs from Zwane et al (2011) and Stango and Zinman (2014) in that the analysis is based on a large population-representative survey used by social science researchers and that the survey effects we study concern a central life-cycle choice – the level of saving
The difference in mean incomes between the not-offered and offered groups reflects the fact that random assignment of the module to those eligible occurred at the level of the individual respondent, as described in the previous Section
Summary
Active saving will reflect the economic circumstances that households face and so to interpret the results that follow, some background is required. De Bresser and Knoef (2015) use responses to the retirement needs module in the LISS panel (our treatment) combined with the administrative wealth data we used in this study and other data to analyse whether the Dutch pension system succeeded in providing an adequate retirement income to its contributors around the time of our study They compare projected annuities from pensions and non-pension savings with the self-reported minimal and desired expenditure levels from the retirement needs module. The median difference between the annuity from pensions and non-housing wealth and the self-reported desired expenditure level is 18% It seems that at the time the retirement module was fielded in LISS (in 2008), a large fraction of the population could significantly reduce their savings and still meet their post-retirement expenditure goals. UPOs have been mandatory for all financial institutions in the Netherlands since 1 January 2008
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
