Voting is a cornerstone of democratic decision-making, but it may also diffuse individual responsibility, potentially encouraging people to support actions they would avoid when deciding alone. Such diffusion of responsibility could lead voters to prioritize relative standing over collective welfare, for example by endorsing policies that reduce others’ advantages even at a cost to overall efficiency. Across two experiments (total N = 1750), including a preregistered replication, we examined whether voting contributes to envy-driven behavior in distributive decisions. Participants made choices in redistribution games under three decision-making rules: individually, through majority voting, or, in Study 2, via a Random Dictator mechanism that involved group decision-making without majority rule. In both studies, voting contributed to a higher rate of envy-driven choices, in which participants sacrificed efficiency to reduce disadvantageous inequality. This effect replicated with nearly identical magnitude in the preregistered study and was strongest when the personal cost of acting enviously was low. Results from the Random Dictator condition indicated that group decision-making alone increased envy-driven behavior, consistent with diffusion of responsibility, while majority rule amplified this effect further. These findings suggest that collective decision-making can shift social preferences by diffusing personal responsibility, thereby fostering competitive motives rather than cooperative ones. This psychological mechanism helps explain why democratic decisions about redistribution may sometimes reflect relative concerns rather than collective welfare.

The European Union’s Omnibus Pricing Directive mandates that traders disclose the lowest price offered in the previous 30 days, aiming to curb inflated reference prices and enhance consumer protection. We present an experimental test of this policy’s behavioural impact. In a pre-registered online experiment with 500 UK consumers (where the Directive is not yet implemented), we examined whether displaying a lower prior price (the “Omnibus Price”) affects willingness to buy, and whether this varies by product type or financial information avoidance. Across all goods, the Omnibus Price significantly reduced purchase intentions, with a larger effect for utilitarian than for hedonic products. No evidence was found that financial ignorance, measured via the Financial Homo Ignorans (FHI) scale, moderated the impact. Our findings provide a behavioural baseline for policymakers and suggest that mandated price transparency can meaningfully dampen consumer demand for products marketed with inflated reference prices.

How can people lead fulfilling lives both thanks to and despite the constant use of digital media and artificial intelligence? While the prevailing narrative often portrays these technologies as generally harmful to well-being, the reality is of course more nuanced—some individuals benefit, while others do not. Existing research has predominantly focused on the general consequences of digital media on well-being, with less attention given to the individual-level antecedents of digital well-being. In the present study, we aimed to identify the traits and characteristics of individuals who use digital tools in ways that promote their well-being. Using a large representative sample from Sweden (N = 1999), we explore how digital self-control, digital literacy (objective and subjective), and digital information ignorance predict digital well-being, life satisfaction, and social anxiety. Digital self-control and subjective digital literacy positively predicted digital well-being. Digital self-control also predicted greater life satisfaction. Finally, digital information ignorance predicted increased life satisfaction and social anxiety. Overall, the current study contributes to a growing literature on digital well-being by exploring its antecedents.

Introduction: Saving is a journey, beginning with the critical decision to initiate the process, take that pivotal first deposit step, and persistently commit to ongoing savings. However, a lot of saving plans fail already before any deposit is made, and even if the first deposit is made, long-run success of savings is far from guaranteed. In this study, we investigate both individual and saving-goal-specific determinants of successful savings.

Method: We use real-life savings data (N = 2,619 saving goals of 808 individuals) from a FinTech company in Sweden that helps individuals save for their goals. In addition, we collect a wide range of individual characteristics related to financial behavior: individuals' objective and subjective financial knowledge, self-control, and information avoidance.

Results and discussion: Our analysis uncovered distinctive patterns at different stages of the saving process. While objective financial knowledge didn't correlate with how much one saves, it was significantly related to the likelihood of making the first deposit. Furthermore, individuals with high self-control exhibited greater savings, though self-control was not related to the initiation of saving. Interestingly, subjective financial literacy and information avoidance showed no significant association with overall savings behavior. Additionally, our study indicated that the attainability of goals plays a crucial role in depositing funds, with more achievable goals having higher deposit likelihoods. Conversely, ambitious goals, despite their challenging nature, tended to attract more substantial savings. Our findings, grounded in real-life data, provide valuable insights into the intricate mechanisms influencing successful saving behaviors, shedding light on the complexities of financial decision-making and goal pursuit.

Information ignorance refers to the act of deliberately avoiding, neglecting, or distorting information to uphold a positive self-image and protect our identity-based beliefs. We apply this framework to household finance and develop a concise 12-item questionnaire measuring individuals' receptiveness to financial information, or the lack thereof - the Financial Homo Ignorans (FHI) Scale. We conduct two studies with samples from the general population in Sweden (total N=2508) and show that the FHI scale has high reliability and distinct from other commonly used individual-difference measures in behavioral finance. We show that individual heterogeneity as assessed by the FHI scale explains a substantial variation in financial behaviors and financial well-being, also when controlling for demographics and financial literacy. These results unequivocally demonstrate the utility of the FHI scale as a valuable instrument for researchers and practitioners in comprehending and addressing the challenges posed by the omnipresence of financial information in today's world.

We conducted two studies investigating how financial well-being was affected by the COVID-19 outbreak. Across both studies conducted in Sweden, we find that COVID-19 was associated with an overall improvement in subjective financial well-being. The positive effect was driven by a general decline in anxiety toward current financial matters, while financial security with regard to the future declined (Study 1) or was unaffected (Study 2). These results might seem paradoxical. But we propose two explanations: (a) People have a limited ability to worry about two things at the same time. Financial problems might therefore be less emotionally salient in the face of more urgent nonfinancial problems and (b) Some people likely experienced an initial slack in their household finances due to decreased spending opportunities at the onset of COVID-19, which to some extent could counteract increased worry about future financial security.

We explore how financial scarcity affects the strategy people choose to pay off their debts and the role of information avoidance in debt repayment. We conduct an online experiment in the United Kingdom (N = 1,000) in which people are endowed with multiple debts and given the task to pay off as many debts as possible during 15 rounds. We manipulate the level of financial scarcity by randomly assigning individuals to experience either a negative, a positive, or no financial shock during these 15 rounds. The results show that perceived financial scarcity is related to less optimal debt repayment. In conclusion, our findings suggest that perceived scarcity propels further scarcity due to poor debt management.

Outcome editing refers to a set of mental rules that people apply when deciding whether to evaluate multiple outcomes jointly or separately, which subsequently affects choice. In a large-scale online survey (n = 2062) we investigate whether individuals use the same outcome editing rules for financial outcomes (e.g., a lottery win) and social outcomes (e.g., a party with friends). We also test the role of numeric ability in explaining outcome editing. Our results show that people’s preferences for combining or separating events depend on whether those events are in the financial or the social domain. Specifically, individuals were more likely to segregate social outcomes than monetary outcomes, except for when all outcomes were negative. Moreover, numeric ability was associated with preferences for outcome editing in the financial domain but not in the social domain. Our findings extend the understanding of the arithmetic operations underlying outcome editing and suggest that people rely more on calculations when making choices involving multiple financial outcomes and more on feelings when making choices involving social outcomes.