Don't Give-Up: Why some intervention schemes encourage suboptimal behavior.

Abstract

Many social challenges stem from individuals' tendency to prefer immediately rewarding but suboptimal behaviors ("Give-Up" options) over more costly endeavors that yield much better outcomes in the long run ("Try" options). For example, many people forgo the long-term benefits of formal education, healthy diets, learning new technologies, and even finding true love. This paper examines various incentivization programs that combine external rewards and punishments to discourage such counterproductive behaviors, which often result in only temporary behavioral change. Our findings suggest that some interventions' limited impact may be due to their focus on only shifting behaviors from "Give-Up" (e.g., dropping out of college, avoiding the gym) to "Try" (e.g., attending college, exercising regularly), without promoting sufficient exploration of these "Try" options. Yet exploration of the long-term benefits of "Trying" may be crucial to increase the chances of long-term learning and commitment. Using a simplified abstraction of this dilemma, our results show a high tendency to choose "Give-Up" options prior to intervention. Examination of four different incentivization strategies suggests that onlyrewarding exploration of new "Try" options is a straightforward strategy to increase exploration and optimal choice. Punishing both the selection of "Give-Up" options and the choice to exploit suboptimal "Try" options produced similar results. Other common guidance strategies were less effective, as these strategies simply tended to replace one suboptimal behavior with another. Surprisingly, punishments seemed to bea relatively more successful incentive than rewards. We discuss how these insights can help guide policy aiming to improve long-term outcomes through incentivization.