We show that a number of noncognitive skills and preferences, including patience and identity, are malleable in adults, and that investments in them reduce crime and violence. We recruited criminally engaged men and randomized one-half to eight weeks of cognitive behavioral therapy designed to foster self-regulation, patience, and a noncriminal identity and lifestyle. We also randomized $200 grants. Cash alone and therapy alone initially reduced crime and violence, but effects dissipated over time. When cash followed therapy, crime and violence decreased dramatically for at least a year. We hypothesize that cash reinforced therapy's impacts by prolonging learning-by-doing, lifestyle changes, and self-investment. (JEL D12, D83, H23, I32, K42, O15, O17)

We show that extremely poor, war-affected women in northern Uganda have high returns to a package of $150 cash, five days of business skills training, and ongoing supervision. Sixteen months after grants, participants doubled their microenterprise ownership and incomes, mainly from petty trading. We also show these ultrapoor have too little social capital, but that group bonds, informal insurance, and cooperative activities could be induced and had positive returns. When the control group received cash and training 20 months later, we varied supervision, which represented half of the program costs. A year later, supervision increased business survival but not consumption. (JEL I38, J16, J23, J24, L26, O15, Z13)

SummaryBackgroundCountries have adopted different approaches, at different times, to reduce the transmission of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). Cross-country comparison could indicate the relative efficacy of these approaches. We assess various non-pharmaceutical interventions (NPIs) over time, comparing the effects of self-imposed (i.e. voluntary) behavior change and of changes enforced via official regulations, by statistically examining their impacts on subsequent death rates in 13 European countries.Methods and findingsWe examine two types of NPI: the introduction of government-enforced closure policies over time; and self-imposed alteration of individual behaviors in response to awareness of the epidemic, in the period prior to regulations. Our proxy for the latter is Google mobility data, which captures voluntary behavior change when disease salience is sufficiently high. The primary outcome variable is the rate of change in COVID-19 fatalities per day, 16-20 days after interventions take place. Linear multivariate regression analysis is used to evaluate impacts. Voluntarily reduced mobility, occurring prior to government policies, decreases the percent change in deaths per day by 9.2 percentage points (95% CI 4.5-14.0 pp). Government closure policies decrease the percent change in deaths per day by 14.0 percentage points (95% CI 10.8-17.2 pp). Disaggregating government policies, the most beneficial are intercity travel restrictions, cancelling public events, and closing non-essential workplaces. Other sub-components, such as closing schools and imposing stay-at-home rules, show smaller and statistically insignificant impacts.ConclusionsThis study shows that NPIs have substantially reduced fatalities arising from COVID-19. Importantly, the effect of voluntary behavior change is of the same order of magnitude as government-mandated regulations. These findings, including the substantial variation across dimensions of closure, have implications for the phased withdrawal of government policies as the epidemic recedes, and for the possible reimposition of regulations if a second wave occurs, especially given the substantial economic and human welfare consequences of maintaining lockdowns.

In this Registered Report, we investigated the impact of a poverty alleviation program on cognitive performance. We analyzed data from a randomized controlled trial conducted on low-income, high-risk individuals in Liberia where a random half of the participants (n=251) received a $200 lump-sum unconditional cash transfer - equivalent approximately to 300% of their monthly income - while the other half (n= 222) did not. We tested both the short-term (2-5 weeks) and the long-term (12-13 months) impact of the treatment via several executive function measures. The observed effect sizes of cash transfers on cognitive performance (b = 0.13 for the short- and b = 0.08 for the long-term) were roughly four times smaller than suggested by prior non-randomized research. Bayesian analyses revealed that the overall evidence supporting the existence of these effects is inconclusive. A multiverse analysis showed that neither alternative analytical specifications nor alternative processing of the dataset changed the results consistently. However cognitive performance varied between the executive function measures, suggesting that cash transfers may affect the subcomponents of executive function differently.

Chapter 1- the importance of the Probability of Winning in Risky Choices: Media reports say that high earners and syndicates buy lottery tickets in bulk. Experimental evidence shows that agents aggressively bid in auctions and contests. Do people try to trade-off probability of winning with other basic risk dimensions (for example, cost) to achieve a subjective threshold probability of winning (in environments they can) even when such choices are second-order stochastic dominated? the literature on risky choices suggests so. In the main design of this experiment, we deconstruct the expected value with variance and skewness of a lottery with Bernoulli distribution to examine the decision-making process. Based on the results, a proportion is classified as expected utility maximizer (EUM) while another proportion seems to achieve a subjective threshold probability of winning (termed as target probability of winning (TPW)). More TPWs prefer higher probabilities compared to EUMs in a constant value lottery set which may explain the preference for negative skewness in experiments. Additionally, we test two contest designs and find TPWs in the population which may explain the puzzle of equilibrium effort more than risk-neutral Nash equilibrium in experiments.

Chapter 2- Reinforcement Learning in Contests: We study contests as an example of winner-take-all competition with linearly ordered large strategy space. We study a model in which each player optimizes the probability of winning above some subjective threshold. The environment we consider is that of limited information where agents play the game repeatedly and know their own efforts and outcomes. Players learn through reinforcement. Predictions are derived based on the model dynamics and asymptotic analysis. The model is able to predict individual behavior regularities found in experimental data and track the behavior at the aggregate level with reasonable accuracy.

Chapter 3- a Mechanism and Matching in a Social Dilemma: Cooperation can be achieved via incentives from future interactions, specifically in the case of public monitoring. But, today, our social and professional spheres keep shifting rapidly and we interact often with strangers. We are interested in such sporadic interactions which can be modeled as a continuous Prisoner’s Dilemma in an environment of the symmetric market where the whole population is competing among themselves to interact with other agents who will contribute the most. The interaction is private, only the agents involved know how much they have contributed to each other’s well-being, and partners may change in the next period. In such an environment if the reputation of agents is not available, then there is no incentive to cooperate. In this paper, we show that if an experience reporting mechanism facilitates assortative matching, then cooperation and honest reporting is evolutionarily (neutral) stable.

Abstract
. A randomized encouragement design yields null average effects of a credit builder loan (CBL) on consumer credit scores. But machine learning algorithms indicate the nulls are due to stark, offsetting treatment effects depending on baseline installment credit activity. Delinquency on preexisting loan obligations drives the negative effects, suggesting that adding a CBL overextends some consumers and generates negative externalities on other lenders. More favorably for the market, CBL take-up generates positive selection on score improvements. Simple changes to CBL practice, particularly to provider screening and credit bureau reporting, could ameliorate the negative effects for consumers and the market.
. Authors have furnished an Internet Appendix, which is available on the Oxford University Press Web site next to the link to the final published paper online.

AbstractObjectiveCountries have adopted different approaches, at different times, to reduce the transmission of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID‐19). Cross‐country comparison could indicate the relative efficacy of these approaches. We assess various nonpharmaceutical interventions (NPIs), comparing the effects of voluntary behavior change and of changes enforced via official regulations, by examining their impacts on subsequent death rates.Data SourcesSecondary data on COVID‐19 deaths from 13 European countries, over March–May 2020.Study DesignWe examine two types of NPI: the introduction of government‐enforced closure policies and self‐imposed alteration of individual behaviors in the period prior to regulations. Our proxy for the latter is Google mobility data, which captures voluntary behavior change when disease salience is sufficiently high. The primary outcome variable is the rate of change in COVID‐19 fatalities per day, 16–20 days after interventions take place. Linear multivariate regression analysis is used to evaluate impacts.Data collection/extraction methods: publicly available.Principal FindingsVoluntarily reduced mobility, occurring prior to government policies, decreases the percent change in deaths per day by 9.2 percentage points (pp) (95% confidence interval [CI] 4.5–14.0 pp). Government closure policies decrease the percent change in deaths per day by 14.0 pp (95% CI 10.8–17.2 pp). Disaggregating government policies, the most beneficial for reducing fatality, are intercity travel restrictions, canceling public events, requiring face masks in some situations, and closing nonessential workplaces. Other sub‐components, such as closing schools and imposing stay‐at‐home rules, show smaller and statistically insignificant impacts.ConclusionsNPIs have substantially reduced fatalities arising from COVID‐19. Importantly, the effect of voluntary behavior change is of the same order of magnitude as government‐mandated regulations. These findings, including the substantial variation across dimensions of closure, have implications for the optimal targeted mix of government policies as the pandemic waxes and wanes, especially given the economic and human welfare consequences of strict regulations.

Covid-19 and the measures taken to contain it have led to unprecedented constraints on work and leisure activities, across the world. This paper uses nationally representative surveys to document how people of different ages and incomes have been affected in the early phase of the pandemic. The data was collected in six countries (China, South Korea, Japan, Italy, UK, and US) in the third week of April 2020. First, we document changes in job circumstances and social activities. Second, we document self-reported negative and positive consequences of the crisis on well-being. We find that young people have experienced more drastic changes to their life and have been most affected economically and psychologically. There is less of a systematic pattern across income groups. While lower income groups have been more affected economically, higher income groups have experienced more changes in their social life and spending. A large fraction of people of low and high income groups report negative effects on well-being.

Summary Background Countries have adopted different approaches, at different times, to reduce the transmission of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). Cross-country comparison could indicate the relative efficacy of these approaches. We assess various non-pharmaceutical interventions (NPIs) over time, comparing the effects of self-imposed (i.e. voluntary) behavior change and of changes enforced via official regulations, by statistically examining their impacts on subsequent death rates in 13 European countries. Methods and findings We examine two types of NPI: the introduction of government-enforced closure policies over time; and self-imposed alteration of individual behaviors in response to awareness of the epidemic, in the period prior to regulations. Our proxy for the latter is Google mobility data, which captures voluntary behavior change when disease salience is sufficiently high. The primary outcome variable is the rate of change in COVID-19 fatalities per day, 16-20 days after interventions take place. Linear multivariate regression analysis is used to evaluate impacts. Voluntarily reduced mobility, occurring prior to government policies, decreases the percent change in deaths per day by 9.2 percentage points (95% CI 4.5-14.0 pp). Government closure policies decrease the percent change in deaths per day by 14.0 percentage points (95% CI 10.8-17.2 pp). Disaggregating government policies, the most beneficial are intercity travel restrictions, cancelling public events, and closing non-essential workplaces. Other sub-components, such as closing schools and imposing stay-at-home rules, show smaller and statistically insignificant impacts. Conclusions This study shows that NPIs have substantially reduced fatalities arising from COVID-19. Importantly, the effect of voluntary behavior change is of the same order of magnitude as government-mandated regulations. These findings, including the substantial variation across dimensions of closure, have implications for the phased withdrawal of government policies as the epidemic recedes, and for the possible reimposition of regulations if a second wave occurs, especially given the substantial economic and human welfare consequences of maintaining lockdowns.

We perform the first rigorous test of a rules of thumb-based approach to financial education on consumer behavior and outcomes. We test two rules of thumb that are targeted at reducing credit card revolving and deliver them in a randomized fashion via e-mail, online banner, and physical mailer. Using monthly administrative data and pre and postintervention credit data on almost 14,000 consumers, we find that the “Do not swipe the small stuff” rule of thumb reduces participants' targeted credit card balance by an average of 2% at a cost of around $0.50 per person. The “Credit keeps charging” rule shows a decline as well but the impact is not significant.

We show that a number of noncognitive skills and preferences, including patience and identity, are malleable in adults, and that investments in them reduce crime and violence. We recruited criminally engaged men and randomized one-half to eight weeks of cognitive behavioral therapy designed to foster self-regulation, patience, and a noncriminal identity and lifestyle. We also randomized $200 grants. Cash alone and therapy alone initially reduced crime and violence, but effects dissipated over time. When cash followed therapy, crime and violence decreased dramatically for at least a year. We hypothesize that cash reinforced therapy's impacts by prolonging learning-by-doing, lifestyle changes, and self-investment. (JEL D12, D83, H23, I32, K42, O15, O17)

Background.By 2009, two decades of war and widespread displacement left the majority of the population of Northern Uganda impoverished.Methods.This study used a cluster-randomized design to test the hypothesis that a poverty alleviation program would improve economic security and reduce symptoms of depression in a sample of mostly young women. Roughly 120 villages in Northern Uganda were invited to participate. Community committees were asked to identify the most vulnerable women (and some men) to participate. The implementing agency screened all proposed participants, and a total of 1800 were enrolled. Following a baseline survey, villages were randomized to a treatment or wait-list control group. Participants in treatment villages received training, start-up capital, and follow-up support. Participants, implementers, and data collectors were not blinded to treatment status.Results.Villages were randomized to the treatment group (60 villages with 896 participants) or the wait-list control group (60 villages with 904 participants) with an allocation ration of 1:1. All clusters participated in the intervention and were included in the analysis. The intent-to-treat analysis included 860 treatment participants and 866 control participants (4.1% attrition). Sixteen months after the program, monthly cash earnings doubled from UGX 22 523 to 51 124, non-household and non-farm businesses doubled, and cash savings roughly quadrupled. There was no measurable effect on a locally derived measure of symptoms of depression.Conclusions.Despite finding large increases in business, income, and savings among the treatment group, we do not find support for an indirect effect of poverty alleviation on symptoms of depression.

We show that extremely poor, war-affected women in northern Uganda have high returns to a package of $150 cash, five days of business skills training, and ongoing supervision. Sixteen months after grants, participants doubled their microenterprise ownership and incomes, mainly from petty trading. We also show these ultrapoor have too little social capital, but that group bonds, informal insurance, and cooperative activities could be induced and had positive returns. When the control group received cash and training 20 months later, we varied supervision, which represented half of the program costs. A year later, supervision increased business survival but not consumption. (JEL I38, J16, J23, J24, L26, O15, Z13)