Coping with Self-Destructive Behavior

  • Shinsuke Ikeda
Part of the Advances in Japanese Business and Economics book series (AJBE, volume 10)


The standard economics known as neoclassical economics assumes that humans are quite rational subjects who always act consistently, like a machine, when solving an optimization problem. Therefore, in neoclassical economics, there are no such things as self-control problems, inconsistent behaviors, or regrettable behaviors. If there is a problem, it occurs only in cases where the choices are distorted due to incomplete information or some kind of transaction constraints or in cases (such as those involving pollution) where someone’s choice bypasses the market and directly influences others (in what is called an externality). As long as there is no such problem, our choices should be rational, either privately or socially, so that efficient resource allocation would be attained through the price mechanism of the market.


Interest Rate Credit Card Personal Rule Consumer Credit Hyperbolic Discount 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


  1. Ainslie, G. W. (2001). Breakdown of will. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Baumeister, R., & Vohs, K. (2003). Willpower, choice and self-control. In G. Loewenstein, D. Read, & R. Baumeister (Eds.), Time and decision: Economic and psychological perspectives on intertemporal choice (pp. 201–216). New York: Russell Sage.Google Scholar
  3. Bénabou, R., & Tirole, J. (2004). Willpower and personal rules. Journal of Political Economy, 112(4), 848–886.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Benartzi, S., & Thaler, R. H. (2004). Save more tomorrow: Using behavioral economics to increase employee saving. Journal of Political Economy, 112(1), S164–S187.Google Scholar
  5. Benjamin, D. J., & Laibson D. I. (2003, June 8–10). Good policies for bad governments: Behavioral political economy. A paper presented at Federal Reserve Bank of Boston Behavioral Economics Conference.Google Scholar
  6. Burger, N., Charness, G., & Lynham, J. (2011). Field and online experiments on self-control. Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, 77(3), 393–404.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Carroll, G. D., Choi, J. J., Laibson, D., Madrian, B. C., & Metrick, A. (2009). Optimal defaults and active decisions. Quarterly Journal of Economics, 124(4), 1639–1974.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. DellaVigna, S., & Malmendier, U. (2006). Paying not to go to the gym. American Economic Review, 96(3), 694–719.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Downs, J. S., Loewenstein, G., & Wisdom, J. (2009). Strategies for promoting healthier food choices. American Economics Review, 99(2), 159–164.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Frank, R. H. (1988). Passions within reason: The strategic role of emotions. New York: W.W. Norton.Google Scholar
  11. Hara, K., Matsushita, Y., Horikoshi, M., Yoshiike, N., Yokoyama, T., Tanaka, H., & Kadowaki, T. (2006). A proposal for the cutoff point of waist circumference for the diagnosis of metabolic syndrome in the Japanese population. Diabetes Care, 29(5), 1123–1124.Google Scholar
  12. Heidhues, P., & Köszegi, B. (2010). Exploiting naïvete about self-control in the credit market. American Economic Review, 100(5), 2279–2303.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Ida, T. (2010). Behavioral economics. Tokyo: Chuko-Shinsho (in Japanese).Google Scholar
  14. Ide, S. (2007). Bankruptcy of consumer loan debtors. Tokyo: Hayakawa-Shobo (in Japanese).Google Scholar
  15. Iwamoto, Y. (2010). How does behavioral economics change policies? In S. Ikeda, H. Ichimura, & H. Itoh (Eds.), Streams of contemporary economics. Tokyo: Toyo-Keizai-Shinpo-Sha (in Japanese).Google Scholar
  16. Just, D. R., & Wansink, B. (2009). Smarter lunchrooms: Using behavioral economics to improve meal selection. Choices, 24(3), 1–7.Google Scholar
  17. Just, D. R., Wansink, B., Mancino, L., & Guthrie, J. (2008). Behavioral economic concepts to encourage healthy eating in school cafeterias: experiments and lessons from college students. (United States Department of Agriculture, Economic Research Report, No. 68).Google Scholar
  18. Krusell, P., Kuruşçu, B., & Smith, A. A., Jr. (2002). Equilibrium welfare and government policy with quasi-geometric discounting. Journal of Economic Theory, 105(1), 42–72.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Krusell, P., Kuruşçu, B., & Smith, A. A., Jr. (2010). Temptation and taxation. Econometrica, 78(6), 2063–2084.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Laibson, D. (1998). Life-cycle consumption and hyperbolic discount functions. European Economic Review, 42(3–5), 861–871.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Lee, J. (2012). Small steps towards a smarter lunchroom: A case study. Food and Brand Lab, Cornell University.Google Scholar
  22. Loewenstein, G., Brennan, T., & Volpp, K. G. (2007). Asymmetric paternalism to improve health behavior. Journal of American Medical Association, 298(20), 2415–2417.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Logue, A. W., & Mazur, J. E. (1981). Maintenance of self-control acquired through a fading procedure: Follow-up on Mazur and Logue (1978). Behavior Analysis Letters, 1, 131–137.Google Scholar
  24. Madrian, B. C., & Shea, D. F. (2001). The power of suggestion: Inertia in 401(k) participation and savings behavior. Quarterly Journal of Economics, 116(4), 1149–1225.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Mazur, J. E., & Logue, A. W. (1978). Choice in a “self-control” paradigm: Effects of a fading procedure. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 30(1), 11–17.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Melvin, S., Jr., & Unayama, T. (2011). The consumption response to seasonal income: Evidence from Japanese public pension benefits. American Economic Journal: Applied Economics, 3(4), 86–118.Google Scholar
  27. National Federation of Health Insurance Societies (2008, 2011). Survey of the public opinion on medical care (in Japanese).Google Scholar
  28. Scharff, R. L. (2009). Obesity and hyperbolic discounting: Evidence and implications. Journal of Consumer Policy, 32(1), 3–21.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Schwartz, M. B. (2007). The influence of a verbal prompt on school lunch fruit consumption: a pilot study. International Journal of Behavioral Nutrition and Physical Activity, 4(6), 1-5.Google Scholar
  30. Shiv, B., & Fedorikhin, A. (1999). Heart and mind in conflict: The interplay of affect and cognition in consumer decision. Journal of Consumer Research, 26(3), 278–292.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Sourdin, P. (2008). Pension contributions as a commitment device: Evidence of sophistication among time-inconsistent households. Journal of Economic Psychology, 29(4), 577–596.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Thaler, R. H., & Sunstein, C. R. (2003). Libertarian paternalism. American Economic Review, 93(2), 175–179.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Thaler, R. H., & Sunstein, C. R. (2008). Nudge improving decisions about health, wealth, and happiness. New York: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
  34. The Ministry of Health, Labour and Welfare (2002). Smoking and health: Report of the Investigation Committee on the Issues of Smoking and Health (New Edition). Tokyo: Hoken-Dojin-Sha (in Japanese).Google Scholar
  35. Variyam, J. N., & Cawley, J. (2006). Nutrition labels and obesity (NBER Working Paper, No. 11956, Cambridge: National Bureau of Economic Research).Google Scholar
  36. Zinman, J. (2010). Restricting consumer credit access: Household survey evidence on effects around the Oregon rate cap. Journal of Banking & Finance, 34(3), 546–556.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Japan 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  • Shinsuke Ikeda
    • 1
  1. 1.Institute of Social and Economic ResearchOsaka UniversityIbarakiJapan

Personalised recommendations