scispace - formally typeset
Search or ask a question
Author

David Laibson

Bio: David Laibson is an academic researcher from Harvard University. The author has contributed to research in topics: Asset allocation & Consumption (economics). The author has an hindex of 81, co-authored 300 publications receiving 39338 citations. Previous affiliations of David Laibson include National Bureau of Economic Research & Dartmouth College.


Papers
More filters
Journal ArticleDOI
David Laibson1
TL;DR: The authors analyzes the decisions of a hyperbolic consumer who has access to an imperfect commitment technology: an illiquid asset whose sale must be initiated one period before the sale proceeds are received.
Abstract: Hyperbolic discount functions induce dynamically inconsistent preferences, implying a motive for consumers to constrain their own future choices. This paper analyzes the decisions of a hyperbolic consumer who has access to an imperfect commitment technology: an illiquid asset whose sale must be initiated one period before the sale proceeds are received. The model predicts that consumption tracks income, and the model explains why consumers have asset-specific marginal propensities to consume. The model suggests that financial innovation may have caused the ongoing decline in U. S. savings rates, since financial innovation in- creases liquidity, eliminating commitment opportunities. Finally, the model implies that financial market innovation may reduce welfare by providing “too much” liquidity.

5,587 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
15 Oct 2004-Science
TL;DR: The authors examined the neural correlates of time discounting while subjects made a series of choices between monetary reward options that varied by delay to delivery and demonstrated that two separate systems are involved in such decisions.
Abstract: When humans are offered the choice between rewards available at different points in time, the relative values of the options are discounted according to their expected delays until delivery. Using functional magnetic resonance imaging, we examined the neural correlates of time discounting while subjects made a series of choices between monetary reward options that varied by delay to delivery. We demonstrate that two separate systems are involved in such decisions. Parts of the limbic system associated with the midbrain dopamine system, including paralimbic cortex, are preferentially activated by decisions involving immediately available rewards. In contrast, regions of the lateral prefrontal cortex and posterior parietal cortex are engaged uniformly by intertemporal choices irrespective of delay. Furthermore, the relative engagement of the two systems is directly associated with subjects' choices, with greater relative fronto-parietal activity when subjects choose longer term options.

2,581 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
James J. Lee1, Robbee Wedow2, Aysu Okbay3, Edward Kong4, Omeed Maghzian4, Meghan Zacher4, Tuan Anh Nguyen-Viet5, Peter Bowers4, Julia Sidorenko6, Julia Sidorenko7, Richard Karlsson Linnér8, Richard Karlsson Linnér3, Mark Alan Fontana9, Mark Alan Fontana5, Tushar Kundu5, Chanwook Lee4, Hui Li4, Ruoxi Li5, Rebecca Royer5, Pascal Timshel10, Pascal Timshel11, Raymond K. Walters4, Raymond K. Walters12, Emily A. Willoughby1, Loic Yengo6, Maris Alver7, Yanchun Bao13, David W. Clark14, Felix R. Day15, Nicholas A. Furlotte, Peter K. Joshi14, Peter K. Joshi16, Kathryn E. Kemper6, Aaron Kleinman, Claudia Langenberg15, Reedik Mägi7, Joey W. Trampush5, Shefali S. Verma17, Yang Wu6, Max Lam, Jing Hua Zhao15, Zhili Zheng18, Zhili Zheng6, Jason D. Boardman2, Harry Campbell14, Jeremy Freese19, Kathleen Mullan Harris20, Caroline Hayward14, Pamela Herd13, Pamela Herd21, Meena Kumari13, Todd Lencz22, Todd Lencz23, Jian'an Luan15, Anil K. Malhotra23, Anil K. Malhotra22, Andres Metspalu7, Lili Milani7, Ken K. Ong15, John R. B. Perry15, David J. Porteous14, Marylyn D. Ritchie17, Melissa C. Smart14, Blair H. Smith24, Joyce Y. Tung, Nicholas J. Wareham15, James F. Wilson14, Jonathan P. Beauchamp25, Dalton Conley26, Tõnu Esko7, Steven F. Lehrer27, Steven F. Lehrer28, Steven F. Lehrer29, Patrik K. E. Magnusson30, Sven Oskarsson31, Tune H. Pers11, Tune H. Pers10, Matthew R. Robinson6, Matthew R. Robinson32, Kevin Thom33, Chelsea Watson5, Christopher F. Chabris17, Michelle N. Meyer17, David Laibson4, Jian Yang6, Magnus Johannesson34, Philipp Koellinger8, Philipp Koellinger3, Patrick Turley12, Patrick Turley4, Peter M. Visscher6, Daniel J. Benjamin28, Daniel J. Benjamin5, David Cesarini28, David Cesarini33 
TL;DR: A joint (multi-phenotype) analysis of educational attainment and three related cognitive phenotypes generates polygenic scores that explain 11–13% of the variance ineducational attainment and 7–10% ofthe variance in cognitive performance, which substantially increases the utility ofpolygenic scores as tools in research.
Abstract: Here we conducted a large-scale genetic association analysis of educational attainment in a sample of approximately 1.1 million individuals and identify 1,271 independent genome-wide-significant SNPs. For the SNPs taken together, we found evidence of heterogeneous effects across environments. The SNPs implicate genes involved in brain-development processes and neuron-to-neuron communication. In a separate analysis of the X chromosome, we identify 10 independent genome-wide-significant SNPs and estimate a SNP heritability of around 0.3% in both men and women, consistent with partial dosage compensation. A joint (multi-phenotype) analysis of educational attainment and three related cognitive phenotypes generates polygenic scores that explain 11-13% of the variance in educational attainment and 7-10% of the variance in cognitive performance. This prediction accuracy substantially increases the utility of polygenic scores as tools in research.

1,658 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
Daniel J. Benjamin1, James O. Berger2, Magnus Johannesson3, Magnus Johannesson1, Brian A. Nosek4, Brian A. Nosek5, Eric-Jan Wagenmakers6, Richard A. Berk7, Kenneth A. Bollen8, Björn Brembs9, Lawrence D. Brown7, Colin F. Camerer10, David Cesarini11, David Cesarini12, Christopher D. Chambers13, Merlise A. Clyde2, Thomas D. Cook14, Thomas D. Cook15, Paul De Boeck16, Zoltan Dienes17, Anna Dreber3, Kenny Easwaran18, Charles Efferson19, Ernst Fehr20, Fiona Fidler21, Andy P. Field17, Malcolm R. Forster22, Edward I. George7, Richard Gonzalez23, Steven N. Goodman24, Edwin J. Green25, Donald P. Green26, Anthony G. Greenwald27, Jarrod D. Hadfield28, Larry V. Hedges15, Leonhard Held20, Teck-Hua Ho29, Herbert Hoijtink30, Daniel J. Hruschka31, Kosuke Imai32, Guido W. Imbens24, John P. A. Ioannidis24, Minjeong Jeon33, James Holland Jones34, Michael Kirchler35, David Laibson36, John A. List37, Roderick J. A. Little23, Arthur Lupia23, Edouard Machery38, Scott E. Maxwell39, Michael A. McCarthy21, Don A. Moore40, Stephen L. Morgan41, Marcus R. Munafò42, Shinichi Nakagawa43, Brendan Nyhan44, Timothy H. Parker45, Luis R. Pericchi46, Marco Perugini47, Jeffrey N. Rouder48, Judith Rousseau49, Victoria Savalei50, Felix D. Schönbrodt51, Thomas Sellke52, Betsy Sinclair53, Dustin Tingley36, Trisha Van Zandt16, Simine Vazire54, Duncan J. Watts55, Christopher Winship36, Robert L. Wolpert2, Yu Xie32, Cristobal Young24, Jonathan Zinman44, Valen E. Johnson1, Valen E. Johnson18 
University of Southern California1, Duke University2, Stockholm School of Economics3, Center for Open Science4, University of Virginia5, University of Amsterdam6, University of Pennsylvania7, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill8, University of Regensburg9, California Institute of Technology10, Research Institute of Industrial Economics11, New York University12, Cardiff University13, Mathematica Policy Research14, Northwestern University15, Ohio State University16, University of Sussex17, Texas A&M University18, Royal Holloway, University of London19, University of Zurich20, University of Melbourne21, University of Wisconsin-Madison22, University of Michigan23, Stanford University24, Rutgers University25, Columbia University26, University of Washington27, University of Edinburgh28, National University of Singapore29, Utrecht University30, Arizona State University31, Princeton University32, University of California, Los Angeles33, Imperial College London34, University of Innsbruck35, Harvard University36, University of Chicago37, University of Pittsburgh38, University of Notre Dame39, University of California, Berkeley40, Johns Hopkins University41, University of Bristol42, University of New South Wales43, Dartmouth College44, Whitman College45, University of Puerto Rico46, University of Milan47, University of California, Irvine48, Paris Dauphine University49, University of British Columbia50, Ludwig Maximilian University of Munich51, Purdue University52, Washington University in St. Louis53, University of California, Davis54, Microsoft55
TL;DR: The default P-value threshold for statistical significance is proposed to be changed from 0.05 to 0.005 for claims of new discoveries in order to reduce uncertainty in the number of discoveries.
Abstract: We propose to change the default P-value threshold for statistical significance from 0.05 to 0.005 for claims of new discoveries.

1,586 citations

Posted Content
TL;DR: This article proposed to change the default P-value threshold for statistical significance for claims of new discoveries from 0.05 to 0.005, which is the threshold used in this paper.
Abstract: We propose to change the default P-value threshold for statistical significance for claims of new discoveries from 0.05 to 0.005.

1,415 citations


Cited by
More filters
Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: In this paper, the authors discuss the discounted utility (DU) model, its historical development, underlying assumptions, and "anomalies" -the empirical regularities that are inconsistent with its theoretical predictions.
Abstract: This paper discusses the discounted utility (DU) model: its historical development, underlying assumptions, and "anomalies" - the empirical regularities that are inconsistent with its theoretical predictions. We then summarize the alternate theoretical formulations that have been advanced to address these anomalies. We also review three decades of empirical research on intertemporal choice, and discuss reasons for the spectacular variation in implicit discount rates across studies. Throughout the paper, we stress the importance of distinguishing time preference, per se, from many other considerations that also influence intertemporal choices.

5,242 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: Kahneman as mentioned in this paper made a statement based on worked out together with Shane Federik the quirkiness of human judgment, which was later used in his speech at the Nobel Prize in economics.
Abstract: Daniel Kahneman received the Nobel Prize in economics sciences in 2002, December 8, Stockholm, Sweden. This article is the edited version of his Nobel Prize lecture. The author comes back to the problems he has studied with the late Amos Tversky and to debates conducting for several decades already. The statement is based on worked out together with Shane Federik the quirkiness of human judgment. Language: ru

4,462 citations

01 Feb 2015
TL;DR: In this article, the authors describe the integrative analysis of 111 reference human epigenomes generated as part of the NIH Roadmap Epigenomics Consortium, profiled for histone modification patterns, DNA accessibility, DNA methylation and RNA expression.
Abstract: The reference human genome sequence set the stage for studies of genetic variation and its association with human disease, but epigenomic studies lack a similar reference. To address this need, the NIH Roadmap Epigenomics Consortium generated the largest collection so far of human epigenomes for primary cells and tissues. Here we describe the integrative analysis of 111 reference human epigenomes generated as part of the programme, profiled for histone modification patterns, DNA accessibility, DNA methylation and RNA expression. We establish global maps of regulatory elements, define regulatory modules of coordinated activity, and their likely activators and repressors. We show that disease- and trait-associated genetic variants are enriched in tissue-specific epigenomic marks, revealing biologically relevant cell types for diverse human traits, and providing a resource for interpreting the molecular basis of human disease. Our results demonstrate the central role of epigenomic information for understanding gene regulation, cellular differentiation and human disease.

4,409 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: An overview of some of the developments in the formulation of ARCH models and a survey of the numerous empirical applications using financial data can be found in this paper, where several suggestions for future research, including the implementation and tests of competing asset pricing theories, market microstructure models, information transmission mechanisms, dynamic hedging strategies, and pricing of derivative assets, are also discussed.

4,206 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: This article reviews a diverse set of proposals for dual processing in higher cognition within largely disconnected literatures in cognitive and social psychology and suggests that while some dual-process theories are concerned with parallel competing processes involving explicit and implicit knowledge systems, others are concerns with the influence of preconscious processes that contextualize and shape deliberative reasoning and decision-making.
Abstract: This article reviews a diverse set of proposals for dual processing in higher cognition within largely disconnected literatures in cognitive and social psychology. All these theories have in common the distinction between cognitive processes that are fast, automatic, and unconscious and those that are slow, deliberative, and conscious. A number of authors have recently suggested that there may be two architecturally (and evolutionarily) distinct cognitive systems underlying these dual-process accounts. However, it emerges that (a) there are multiple kinds of implicit processes described by different theorists and (b) not all of the proposed attributes of the two kinds of processing can be sensibly mapped on to two systems as currently conceived. It is suggested that while some dual-process theories are concerned with parallel competing processes involving explicit and implicit knowledge systems, others are concerned with the influence of preconscious processes that contextualize and shape deliberative reasoning and decision-making.

3,859 citations