英文标题：
《Rational Inattention and Retirement Puzzles》
---
作者：
Jamie Hentall MacCuish
---
最新提交年份：
2019
---
英文摘要：
  I present evidence incorporating costly thought solves three puzzles in the retirement literature. The first puzzle is, given incentives, the extent of bunching of labour market exits at legislated state pension ages (SPA) seems incompatible with rational expectations. Adding to the evidence for this puzzle, I include an empirical analysis focusing on whether liquidity constraints can explain this bunching and find they cannot. The nature of this puzzle is clarified by exploring a life-cycle model with rational agents that matches aggregate profiles. This model succeeds in matching aggregates by overestimating the impact of the SPA on poorer individuals whilst underestimating its impact on wealthier people. The second puzzle is people are often mistaken about their own pension provisions. Concerning the second puzzle, I incorporate rational inattention to the SPA into the aforementioned life-cycle model, allowing for mistaken beliefs. To the best of my knowledge, this paper is the first not only to incorporate rational inattention into a life-cycle model but also to assess a rationally inattentive model against non-experimental individual choice data. This facilitates another important contribution: discipling the cost of attention with subjective belief data. Preliminary results indicate rational inattention improves the aggregate fit and better matches the response of participation to the SPA across the wealth distribution, hence offering a resolution to the first puzzle. The third puzzle is despite actuarially advantageous options to defer receipt of pension benefits, take up is extremely low. An extension of the model generates an explanation of this last puzzle: the actuarial calculations implying deferral is preferable ignore the utility cost of tracking your pension which can be avoided by claiming. These puzzles are researched in the context of the reform to the UK female SPA.
---
中文摘要：
我提出的证据结合了昂贵的思想，解决了退休文献中的三个难题。第一个难题是，考虑到激励因素，法定国家养老金年龄（SPA）劳动力市场退出的集中程度似乎与理性预期不符。除此之外，我还加入了一项实证分析，重点关注流动性约束是否能够解释这种聚集现象，并发现它们无法解释。通过探索一个具有与聚合配置文件匹配的理性代理的生命周期模型，澄清了这个难题的本质。该模型通过高估SPA对穷人的影响，同时低估其对富人的影响，成功地匹配了总量。第二个谜团是人们经常误解自己的养老金规定。关于第二个谜题，我将对SPA的理性忽视纳入上述生命周期模型，允许错误的信念。据我所知，这篇论文不仅首次将理性疏忽纳入生命周期模型，而且还根据非实验性个人选择数据评估了理性疏忽模型。这有助于做出另一个重要贡献：用主观信念数据控制注意力的成本。初步结果表明，理性的疏忽改善了总体拟合，并更好地匹配了整个财富分配中参与SPA的反应，从而解决了第一个难题。第三个难题是，尽管有推迟领取养老金福利的精算优势选择，但接受率极低。该模型的扩展解释了最后一个难题：暗示延期的精算计算最好忽略跟踪养老金的效用成本，这可以通过索赔避免。这些困惑是在英国女性SPA改革的背景下研究的。
---
分类信息：

一级分类：Economics        经济学
二级分类：General Economics        一般经济学
分类描述：General methodological, applied, and empirical contributions to economics.
对经济学的一般方法、应用和经验贡献。
--
一级分类：Quantitative Finance        数量金融学
二级分类：Economics        经济学
分类描述：q-fin.EC is an alias for econ.GN. Economics, including micro and macro economics, international economics, theory of the firm, labor economics, and other economic topics outside finance
q-fin.ec是econ.gn的别名。经济学，包括微观和宏观经济学、国际经济学、企业理论、劳动经济学和其他金融以外的经济专题
--

---
PDF下载：
-->