Prof. Radbruch erforscht, wie Entscheidungsprozesse in Arbeitsmarkt- und Bildungskontexten funktionieren — insbesondere wie Bewertungen entstehen, welche Rolle Aufmerksamkeit und Selbstauswahl spielen, und wie äußere Einflüsse (wie die Reihenfolge von Kandidaten oder Aufgabenzuordnung) die Leistung und Motivation von Menschen beeinflussen. Seine aktuellen Arbeiten nutzen Feldexperimente und Datenanalysen aus realen Einstellungs- und Zulassungsprozessen, um zu zeigen, dass subjektive Bewertungen durch Kontexteffekte verzerrt werden und dass Aufmerksamkeitslenkung zwar bessere Entscheidungen in einem Bereich fördert, aber negative Nebenwirkungen in anderen Bereichen auslöst. Die Erkenntnisse sind relevant für Personalauswahl, Bildungsinstitutionen und Organisationen, die faire und effiziente Auswahlverfahren gestalten möchten.
🔒 Das System hat 243 mögliche Industrie-Partner gefunden — Firmen, Scores und Begründungen sind nur für eingeloggte Nutzer:innen sichtbar. Anmelden
Prof. Dr. Jonas Radbruch
HU-FIS-Profil ↗Förderer: DFG Sonderforschungsbereich Zeitraum: 01/2025 - 12/2028 Projektleitung: Prof. Dr. Jonas Radbruch
The Review of Economic Studies · DOI
Abstract This article investigates how incentives and behavioural policy interventions affect individuals’ allocation of scarce cognitive resources. Based on experimental evidence, we demonstrate that incentives systematically influence individuals’ allocation of cognitive resources, and their propensity to actively engage with a decision or to stay passive. Policies that steer individuals’ attention to a specific decision lead to more active decision-making and better choices in the targeted choice domain, but induce negative cognitive spillovers on the quality of choices in other domains. In our setting, these two countervailing effects offset each other, such that the overall payoff consequences of the interventions are essentially zero. We further document that cognitive spillovers are especially pronounced for complex choices and for subgroups of the population with a smaller stock of cognitive resources. We discuss implications for the design and evaluation of behavioural policy interventions.
Management Science · DOI
Agents’ decisions to exert effort depend on the incentives and the potential costs involved. So far, most of the attention has been on the incentive side. However, our laboratory experiments underline that both the incentive and the cost side can be used separately to shape work performance. In our experiment, subjects work on a real-effort slider task. Between treatments, we vary the incentive scheme used for compensating workers. Additionally, by varying the available outside options, we explore the role of implicit costs of effort in determining workers’ performance. We observe that incentive contracts and implicit costs interact in a nontrivial manner. In general, performance decreases as implicit costs increase. Yet the magnitude of the reaction differs across incentive schemes and across the offered outside options, which, in turn, alters estimated output elasticities. In addition, comparisons between incentive schemes crucially depend on the implicit costs. This paper was accepted by Yan Chen, decision analysis.
The Review of Economic Studies · DOI
Abstract Interviewing is a decisive stage of most processes that match candidates to firms and organizations. This article studies how and why a candidate’s interview outcome depends on the other candidates interviewed by the same evaluator. We use large-scale data from high-stakes admission and hiring processes, where candidates are quasi-randomly assigned to evaluators and time slots. We find that the individual assessment decreases as the quality of other candidates assigned to the same evaluator increases. The influence of the previous candidate stands out, leading to a negative autocorrelation in evaluators’ votes of up to 40% and distorting final admission and hiring decisions. Our findings are in line with a contrast effect model where evaluators form a benchmark through associative recall. We assess potential changes in the design of interview processes to mitigate contrasting against the previous candidate.