Abstract
AbstractWe offer a novel test of whether non-binding goals set ahead of a task are effective motivators, taking into account that individuals in principle could easily revise these goals. In our setting, subjects either set a goal some days prior to an online task (early goal) or right at the start of the task (late goal). Two further treatments allow for (unanticipated) explicit revision of the early goal. We observe that (i) early goals are larger than late goals; (ii) subjects who set early goals work more than those who only set a late goal if they explicitly revise their goal and are reminded about their revised goal. A secondary contribution of our paper is that our design addresses a treatment migration problem present in earlier studies on goals that stems from the fact that subjects in a ‘no goals’ control condition may privately set goals.
Funder
Interacting Minds Seeds, Aarhus University
Aarhus Universitet
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Reference75 articles.
1. Abeler, J., Falk, A., Götte, L., & Huffman, D. (2011). Reference points and effort provision. American Economic Review, 101, 470–492.
2. Acland, D., & Levy, M. R. (2015). Naiveté, projection bias, and habit formation in gym attendance. Management Science, 61, 146–160.
3. Akina, Z., & Karagozoglub, E. (2017). The role of goals and feedback in incentivizing performance. Managerial and Decision Economics, 38, 193–211.
4. Anshel, M. H., Weinberg, R., & Jackson, A. (1992). The effect of goal difficulty and task complexity on intrinsic motivation and motor performance. Journal of Sport Behavior, 15, 159.
5. Augenblick, N., Niederle, M., & Sprenger, C. (2015). Working over time: Dynamic inconsistency in real effort tasks. Quarterly Journal of Economics, 130, 1067–1115.