Working Papers
Strategic Ignorance and the Perceived Efficacy of Taking Action
with Tillmann Eymess, Angelika Budjan, and Alice Soldà
Conditionally accepted at the Economic Journal
Abstract: When useful information is distressing, it may deliberately be ignored. In this paper, we examine both theoretically and experimentally whether increasing perceived efficacy — the belief that one’s actions can influence an outcome — reduces such strategic ignorance. Participants in India are given the choice to receive or avoid information about the average loss in life expectancy due to air pollution in their district and are later asked to recall it. We find that increasing perceived efficacy significantly improved recall, particularly among participants with optimistic prior beliefs. The pattern is confirmed when conducting the same experiment in the United States. Our theoretical framework highlights how perceived efficacy shapes the interplay between anticipatory and realized utility, thereby influencing strategic ignorance.
Link to working paper
Media coverage: Psychology Today
Air Pollution and Behavioral Responses to Income Status Perceptions
with Tillmann Eymess and Angelika Budjan
Under review
Abstract: This paper examines how perceived income status shapes individual behavioral responses to air pollution, holding actual income constant. In a randomized online survey experiment with 1,253 adults in India, participants are informed about their position in the state-level income distribution. Given widespread underestimation of income rank, the information treatment shifts perceived status upward on average. This increase in perceived rank lowers reported health concerns about air pollution, reduces intended adoption of private protective measures, and decreases support for public mitigation as measured by real-stakes contributions to environmental NGOs. These findings suggest that perceptions of income status affect the relative value placed on health versus consumption, shaping both private adaptation and support for collective environmental action.
Policies that allocate benefits or resources based solely on individuals’ income levels may mispredict behavioral responses if they neglect the role of perceived social status in shaping environmental and health decisions.
Racial Disparities in Environmental Auditing
with Tom Zeising
Abstract: This paper investigates the role of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency in advancing environmental justice through monitoring and enforcement efforts mandated by the Clean Air Act. Our analysis relies on a comprehensive dataset encompassing auditing information from all environmentally relevant plants between 2000 and 2018. Leveraging county-level variation in racial composition and environmental auditing, we find a substantial and persistent reduction in the proportion of inspected plants following increases in the share of non-White population. This decline coincides with a decrease in political activism, particularly among entities typically advocating for more stringent environmental protection.
Media coverage: Ruperto Carola Research Magazine 2025
Zero-Sum Views Reduce Support for Redistribution Across Borders
with Diego Marino Fages
Abstract: This paper provides causal evidence on how zero-sum beliefs shape support for cross-border redistribution and economic openness. We implement a pre-registered two-by-two experiment with a broadly representative sample of 2,116 UK adults. The first treatment primes participants to adopt stronger or weaker zero-sum mindsets in general social and economic interactions, without reference to redistribution. Inducing a stronger zero-sum mindset significantly reduces donations to international anti-poverty organizations and modestly lowers stated support for international redistribution, migration, and trade. The second treatment provides information about respondents’ position in the global income distribution. Learning one’s relative global advantage fully offsets the negative effects of zero-sum priming. These results demonstrate that zero-sum beliefs causally reduce support for global redistribution and openness, but that making relative global affluence salient can neutralize this effect. The findings highlight a belief-based channel through which economic narratives shape public attitudes toward globalization, offering new insight into the appeal of rising nationalist and protectionist rhetoric in high-income countries.