Title,Citation,Topic_area,Study_type,Study_evidence_rating,Outcome_effectiveness,Findings,Intervention_program,Topics,Target_population,Firm_characteristics,Geographic_setting,Original_publication_date,Original_publication_link,"Review Protocol"
"Synthesis Report: Behavioral Finance Synthesis: Findings",,"Behavioral Finance: Retirement",,,,"Findings:

  
  
  

  
  
  

  
  
  

          People have relatively limited knowledge about saving for retirement and can be induced to save more when provided with additional information.

          Making retirement more salient, by having people think of themselves in retirement or providing a target retirement date, can increase intentions to save and alter investment choices.

          People can become overwhelmed by the number of investment options they face; when this occurs, they tend to use simple rules to make decisions.",,"Employer provided retirement benefits","Adult, Older worker",,"United States",,,"Behavioral Finance: Retirement Review Protocol"
"Synthesis Report: Behavioral Finance Synthesis: Gaps",,"Behavioral Finance: Retirement",,,,"Findings:

  
  
  

  
  
  

  
  
  

          Many studies have demonstrated a relationship between default options and behavior. Taken together, these studies suggest that default options can affect investment behavior.

          But no study produces strong causal evidence on the impacts of defaults on its own.

          There is little evidence available on how the impacts of behavioral interventions designed to influence retirement savings vary by employee age, gender, income, or race.

          There is little evidence available on how the impacts of behavioral interventions designed to influence retirement affect total savings.",,,,,,,,"Behavioral Finance: Retirement Review Protocol"
"Framing and claiming: How information-framing affects expected social security claiming behavior","Brown, J. R., Kapteyn, A., & Mitchell, O. S. (2016). Framing and claiming: How information-framing affects expected social security claiming behavior. Journal of Risk and Insurance, 83(1), 139-162.","Behavioral Finance: Retirement, Behavioral Insights","Study Type: Causal Impact Analysis","Causal Evidence Rating: Low Causal Evidence","Public benefits receipt-Low-Favorable impacts
      
    
  
              


      
            Public benefit receipt","Summary:

	The study’s objective was to examine the impact of different ways of framing retirement information on the age at which individuals intended to claim Social Security benefits.
	The authors randomly assigned people who had been employed for at least 10 years and had yet to claim Social Security benefits to receive different messages about claiming the benefits. Each message contained the same financial information, but the information was presented—or framed—in different ways. There were 10 different messages—9 treatment conditions and one control condition that presented neutral information. Each study participant received 6 of the 10 messages.
	The study found that, on average, those presented with the break-even treatment were more likely to indicate a younger intended age to receive benefits compared with those presented with the control condition, whereas those who received 4 of the other treatment conditions expressed an older intended age compared with the control condition.
	The quality of causal evidence presented in this report is low because it was based on a randomized controlled trial with unknown attrition and the authors did not ensure that the groups being compared were similar before the intervention. This means we are not confident that the estimated effects are attributable to the framing of information about the age at which Social Security is collected; other factors are likely to have contributed.",,"Federal retirement benefits Behavioral interventions",Employed,,"United States",2016,,"Behavioral Finance: Retirement, Behavioral Insights Review Protocol"
"Would people behave differently if they better understood Social Security? Evidence from a field experiment","Liebman, J., & Luttmer, E. (2011). Would people behave differently if they better understood Social Security? Evidence from a field experiment. National Bureau of Economic Research working paper no. 17287. Cambridge, MA: NBER.","Behavioral Finance: Retirement, Behavioral Insights","Study Type: Causal Impact Analysis","Causal Evidence Rating: Moderate Causal Evidence",,"Summary:

	
	
		The study’s objective was to examine the impact of providing information about Social Security rules and benefits on labor force participation, knowledge of Social Security, and claiming of Social Security benefits.
		Workers nearing retirement age were randomly assigned into either the treatment group, which was sent an informational brochure about Social Security and invited to a 15-minute web tutorial on Social Security provisions, or to the control group, which was not offered this information but could seek other publicly available information about Social Security. The authors measured outcomes through a follow-up survey conducted 13 months after random assignment.
		The study found that, on average, members of the treatment group were more likely to work for pay in the last month and were more likely to be aware that Social Security benefits were based on the number of years with the highest earnings, compared with the control group. However, there were no statistically significant differences between the two groups on any other outcomes related to earnings and employment, Social Security benefit receipt, or understanding Social Security rules.
		The quality of causal evidence presented in this report is moderate because it was based on a well-conducted randomized controlled trial with high attrition and adequate control variables. This means we are somewhat confident that the estimated effects are attributable to providing information about Social Security provisions, but other factors might also have contributed.",,,Employed,,,2011,http://www.nber.org/papers/w17287.pdf,"Behavioral Finance: Retirement, Behavioral Insights Review Protocol"
"Details matter: The impact of presentation and information on the take-up of financial incentives for retirement saving","Saez, E. (2009). Details matter: The impact of presentation and information on the take-up of financial incentives for retirement saving. American Economic Journal: Economic Policy, 1(1), 204-228.","Behavioral Finance: Retirement, Behavioral Insights","Study Type: Causal Impact Analysis","Causal Evidence Rating: High Causal Evidence",,"Summary:

	
	
		The study’s objective was to examine the impact of contribution matches, credit rebates, and advance notification on tax filers’ decisions about opening an individual retirement account (IRA) during the tax preparation process and the amount they contributed to the IRA.
		The authors randomly assigned tax filers at 60 H&R Block locations in St. Louis, Missouri, to treatment conditions, defined by whether the filers were offered a 50 percent one-time match on IRA contributions, a 33 percent credit rebate on IRA contributions, or a 50 percent match on one-time and monthly IRA contributions. H&R Block provided tax filing information from the 2005 and 2006 tax years as well as background information on the filers.
		The study found that offering a 50 percent match on one-time IRA contributions and offering a 33 percent credit rebate increased the likelihood of opening an IRA and the amount contributed, but the effect on the likelihood of opening an IRA was larger for the 50 percent match treatment group.
		The quality of causal evidence is high for some outcomes because they were based on a well-implemented randomized controlled trial. This means we are confident that the estimated effects are attributable to the treatment under study, and not to other factors. However, the quality of causal evidence for other outcomes is low because the analyses were based on a nonrandom subset of the randomized sample, and the author did not use sufficient controls when estimating impacts.",,,Adult,,,2009,,"Behavioral Finance: Retirement, Behavioral Insights Review Protocol"
"How much choice is too much? Contributions to 401 (k) retirement plans","Iyengar, S.S., Huberman, G., & Jiang, W. (2003). How much choice is too much? Contributions to 401 (k) retirement plans. Pension Research Council working paper.","Behavioral Finance: Retirement","Study Type: Causal Impact Analysis","Causal Evidence Rating: Low Causal Evidence","Employer benefits receipt-Low-Unfavorable impacts
      
    
  
              


      
            Employer benefits receipt","Summary:

This study’s objective was to examine whether the number of fund options offered by a 401(k) retirement plan influenced employees’ decisions to enroll in the plan.
The authors analyzed employees’ participation rates in 401(k) plans using administrative data provided by an investment management company and regression analysis, controlling for both employee- and plan-level characteristics.
The analysis demonstrated that as the number of fund options increased, employees became less likely to enroll in a 401(k) plan. Adding one fund to the list of investment options was associated with a decrease in participation of 0.15 to 0.20 percentage points.
The quality of causal evidence presented in this study is low. This means that we are not confident that the increase in the number of funds offered caused the decrease in 401(k) enrollment. Other factors are likely to have contributed to the observed relationship.","the Number of Fund Choices","Employer provided retirement benefits",Employed,,"United States",2003,,"Behavioral Finance: Retirement Review Protocol"