본문 바로가기
KERD
논문KCI 등재

연금화 의사결정과 닻 내리기 효과

Annuitization Decision Making and Anchoring Effect

윤민재|주소현
한국소비자학회 (Korean Society Of Consumer Studies)|2014.10|소비자학연구 (Journal of Consumer Studies)|제25권 제5호|pp. 147-166

0

조회

0

다운로드

3

인용

0

참고문헌

키워드

종신연금Annuitization연금화Retirement Asset ManagementLife Annuity은퇴재무설계은퇴자산관리Anchoring EffectsRetirement Planning닻 내리기 효과
주제분류경제학

초록

기대수명의 증가와 조기 은퇴의 확산 등으로 인하여 점차 은퇴 기간이 길어짐에 따라 은퇴 자금 축적 및 증식 못지않게 은퇴자금을 어떻게 관리하여 자금의 고갈 없이 은퇴 생활비를 조달할 것인가가 중요한 문제로 자리 잡고 있다. 본 연구는 개인 소비자의 은퇴설계에서 연금화 관련 의사결정에 심리적인 편향 중 하나인 닻 내리기(Anchoring)가 영향을 미칠 수 있을 것인지 살펴보고자 하였다. 서울 및 수도권에 거주하고 있는 40대 남녀 806명을 대상으로 실험 조작을 포함한 온라인 설문을 실시한 결과, 연금화 의사결정에 닻 내리기가 영향을 미칠 수 있음이 나타났다. 본 연구에서는 연금화와 관련된 주요 이슈 중 하나인 연금화 비중에 대하여 살펴보았는데, 이를 은퇴이후 개인이 희망하는 은퇴생활비의 몇 %를 연금으로 수령 받고자 하는가에 대한 연금수령 프레임과 은퇴자금의 몇 %를 연금에 가입할 것인가에 대한 연금가입 프레임으로 나누어서 살펴보았다. 또한, 닻을 제공하는 자를 전문가와 일반인으로 나누어서 제시하여 닻 제공자의 신빙성에 따른 차이를 살펴보고자 하였으며 닻 수준을 큰 수(높은 수준 닻)와 작은 수(낮은 수준 닻)로 나누어서 닻 내리기효과를 파악하고자 하였다. 연구의 결과 연금수령 프레임과 연금가입 프레임 모두 닻 내리기 효과를 발견할 수 있었다. 또한, 다른 변수를 통제한 상황에서도 닻 내리기 효과가 나타나는지를 보기 위하여 회귀분석을 실시한 결과 연금수령 및 연금가입 비중에 닻 내리기가 중요한 영향을 미치는 변수로 나타났다. 본 연구의 결과는 개인의 심리적인 편향 중 하나인 닻 내리기가 은퇴재무설계에서 유용하게 활용될 수 있는 특성임을 시사한다.

Abstract

Considering the current demographic trends in Korea, retirement planning is one of the most significant issues for the well-being of individuals and families in their later lives. Due to the elongated life expectancy, longevity risk has been the key issue in retirement planning. Therefore, managing retirement asset has been equally as or more significant than preparing retirement asset, because asset depletion is one of the major threat that retirees confront during retirement. So far retirement asset management research has been conducted under the topics of portfolio management and retirement asset withdrawal strategies(e.g., Blanchett, Kowara, & Chen, 2012; Dybvig & Liu, 2010; Horneff et. al, 2010; Milevsky & Robinson, 2005). Several research has been examined the annuitization strategies and annuitization decision making for consumers (e.g., Milevsky & Young, 2007). Annuitization can be explained as a process in which a retiree converts his or her retirement asset into a periodic payment to cover his or her living expenses during retirement years. To properly hedge the longevity risk, consumers need to consider annuitization of their retirement asset. Annuitization decision making is not an easy task for consumers. There could be various factors that influence annuitization decision making. This research tries to examine one of the factors that could influence consumers' annuitization decision making process, the psychological factor called anchoring. Anchoring is a psychological heuristic or bias in human decision making. Anchoring effect refers to the influences of anchor(or an initial information) on human judgement. Consumers normally are influenced by some initial information on their decision making even though the initial information is un-related to the decision making issue. Previous research has shown that anchoring effect are present in financial decision making(e.g., Epley & Gilovich, 2005; McEloy & Dowd, 2007; Yudkowsky, 2006). However, no research has been conducted to examine anchoring effect in annuitization decision making.The purpose of this research was to examine anchoring effect in annuitization decision especially with the desired annuity amount in retirement income and annuitizaiton ratio out of retirement asset. A survey with 806 respondents in their 40s who are living in Seoul metropolitan area was conducted during February of 2013. The annuitization decision was divided into two different frames: annuity amount and annuitization ratio frames. Respondents who were assigned annuity amount frame were asked to answer their desired annuity amount in retirement income (living expenses). Respondents who were assigned annuitization ratio were asked to answer their desired annuitization amount(i.e. amount to use in purchasing life annuity products) out of the retirement asset that they prepared until retirement. Each frame included four anchors and one neutral question. The four anchors were professional high anchor, peer high anchor, professional low anchor, and peer low anchor. As such this research was designed to examine anchoring effects on high and low anchors and professional and peer anchors. Each respondent was randomly assigned to be exposed to one of the anchors or the neutral question. To examine the anchoring effect the Anchoring Index as presented in Jacowitz and Kahneman(1995) was calculated. In addition, standardized measures to the neutral questions were also calculated. To test the anchoring effects descriptive analyses were conducted as well as Mann-Whitney test. In addition, step-wise regression was conducted to examine related factors to annuitization decision. The findings showed that there were possible anchoring effects on annuitization decision making. Those who were exposed to high anchors showed higher levels of annuitization intention and those who were exposed to low anchors showed lower levels of annuitization intention than the neutral respondents. The professional anchors had stronger effects than peer anchors in annuitization ratio frame only. Therefore, the effects of anchoring source should be further examined. These findings provide several implications for practice and research. As suggested in the previous literature, anchoring is one of the strongest human bias in decision making and is hard to overcome. However, anchoring can be used effectively in consumer decision making. The findings from this research showed that in practice, anchoring can be used to educate and guide consumer decision. As mentioned above, annuitization decision making is one of the most important and difficult decision making in retirement planning. By effectively using psychological characteristics of consumers, professionals and educators can better help consumer in retirement decision making. Future research on behavioral finance topics with retirement planning is needed to further develop literature in this area. This research can provide useful insights in annuitization decision making with behavioral finance topics.

참고문헌 (42)

  1. 강민애, "놀이공원 할인준거점이 기대할인에 미치는 영향", 경기관광연구, 13(134), pp.59~67 (2009)
  2. 강현모, "투자자의 손실회피성과 준거점이 금융상품 선택에 미치는 영향", 경영연구, 24(4), pp.1~27 (2009), 한국산업경영학회
  3. 김석영, "개인종신연금보험의 장수리스크 분석 및 해징방안", 보험학회지, 76(76), pp.32~60 (2007), 한국보험학회
  4. 김종진, "인터넷에서의 Anchoring 효과 분석 : Instant Poll을 중심으로", Journal of Information Technology Applications & Management, 14(1), pp.21~36 (2007), 한국데이타베이스학회
  5. 나혜림, "자기통제가 은퇴준비행동에 미치는 영향 연구", Financial Planning Review, 6(1), pp.27~60 (2013), 한국FP학회
  6. 문숙재, "가계의 개인연금 보유여부와 불입액이 영향요인 분석", 대한가정학회지, 35(5), pp.265~277 (1997)
  7. 박광수, "개인재무설계" (2014), 경문사
  8. 박희정, "'누구’의 생각이니까: 거점효과에서 제공자 신빙성의 역할", 한국심리학회지: 사회및성격, 25(3), pp.47~60 (2011), 한국사회및성격심리학회
  9. 신종욱, "개인연금의 금전적 가치와 역선택에 관한연구", 계리학연구, 2(1), pp.33~63 (2010)
  10. 이경희, "자가 연금 전략의 재원부족 리스크 분석", 보험학회지, 82(82), pp.61~94 (2009), 한국보험학회
  11. 이승희, "애널리스트의 이익추정과 행동재무학적 휴리스틱", 소비자학연구, 24(2), pp.201~222 (2013), 한국소비자학회
  12. 이현숙, "조절초점과 해석수준이론에 따른 은퇴준비 태도 및 행동", Financial Planning Review, 7(2), pp.1~32 (2014), 한국FP학회
  13. 전승훈, "개인연금 가입 결정 및 가입상태 변화 분석", 보험금융연구, 17(1), pp.137~168 (2006), 보험연구원
  14. 주소현, "개인연금 보유 및 연금불입액의 관련요인 분석: 상속동기를 포함하여", 소비자학연구, 22(3), pp.183~206 (2011), 한국소비자학회
  15. 주소현, "프레이밍효과에 따른 종신연금 가입의사", 소비문화연구, 15(4), pp.81~99 (2012), 한국소비문화학회
  16. 하영원, "우연히 노출된 제품가격에 의한 정박 효과의 경계조건과 심리적 특성", 마케팅연구, 26(1), pp.47~71 (2011), 한국마케팅학회
  17. Bernheim, Douglas, ""How Strong are Bequest Motives on Estimates of the Demand for Life Insurance?"Journal of Political Economy 93(6)", 1045-1076 (1991)
  18. Blanchette, David, "Optimal Withdrawal Strategy for Retirement Income Portfolio" (2012), Moriningstar
  19. Brothers, Linda S., "An Individuals' Chosen Retirement Age: When is the Economically Feasible Retirement Age Chosen Over the Anchor Provided by Known Others?", North American Actuarial Journal, 7(3), pp.85~110 (2003)
  20. Brown, Jeffrey R., "Private Pensions, Mortality Risk, and the Decision to Annuitize", Journal of Public Economics, 82(1), pp.29~62 (2001)
  21. Anchoring Bias in Consensus Forecasts and Its Effects on Market Prices, "Campbell, Sean D.", Federal Reserve Board, ~, pp.Finance and Economic Discussion Series 2007-12 (2007)
  22. Dus, Ivica, "Betting on Death and Capital Markets in Retirement : A Shortfall Risk Analysis of Life Annuities versus Phased Withdrawal Plans", Financial Services Review, 14, pp.169~196 (2005)
  23. Dybvig, Philip H., "Lifetime Consumption and Investment : Retirement and Constrained Borrowing", Journal of Economic Theory, 145, pp.885~907 (2010)
  24. Englich, Birte, "Sentencing Under Uncertainty : Anchoring Effects in the Courtroom", Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 31, pp.1535~1551 (2001)
  25. Epley, Nicholas, "When Effortful Thinking Influences Judgmental Anchoring : Differential Effects of Forewarning and Incentives on Self-Generated and Externally Provided Anchors", Journal of Behavioral Decision Making, 18, pp.199~212 (2005)
  26. Friedman, Benjamin, "Pensions in the U.S. Economy", pp.53~77 (1988), University of Chicago Press
  27. Galinsky, Adam D., "First Offers as Anchors : The Role of Perspective-Taking and Negotiator Focus", Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 81, pp.657~669 (2001)
  28. Optimizing the Retirement Portfolio: Asset Allocation, Annuitization, and Risk Aversion, "Horneff, Wolfram J.", NBER, ~, pp.Working Paper 12392 (2006)
  29. Horneff, Wolfram, J., "Variable Payout Annuities and Dynamic Portfolio Choice in Retirement", Journal of Pension Economics and Finance, 9(2), pp.163~183 (2010)
  30. Hurd, Michael D., "Savings of the Elderly and Desired Bequest", American Economic Review, 77, pp.298~312 (1987)
  31. Hurd, Michael D., "Mortality Risk and Bequests", Econometrica, 57(4), pp.779~813 (1989)
  32. Jacowitz, Karen E, "Measures of Anchoring in Estimation Tasks", Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 21(11), pp.1161~1166 (1995)
  33. Kingston, Geoffrey, "Annuitization and Asset Allocation with HARA Utility", Journal of Pension Economics and Finance, 4(3), pp.225~248 (2005)
  34. Kristense, Henrik, "The Effects of Anchor Points and Reference Points on Negotiation Process and Outcome", Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Process, 71(1), pp.85~94 (1997)
  35. Laitner, John, "New Evidence on Altruism : A Study of TIAACREF Retirees", American Economic Review, 86(4), pp.893~908 (1996)
  36. McElroy, Todd, "Susceptibility to Anchoring Effects : How Openness-to-Experience Influences Responses to Anchoring Cues", Judgment and Decision Making, 2(1), pp.48~53 (2007)
  37. Milevsky, Moshe A., "A Sustainable Spending Rate Without Simulation", Financial Analyst Journal, 61(6), pp.89~100 (2005)
  38. Milevsky, Moshe A., "The Timing of Annuitizaion : Investment Dominance and Mortality", Insurance : Mathematics and Economics, 40, pp.135~144 (2007)
  39. "Withdrawal Rate Strategies for Retirement Portfolios: Perventive Reductions and Risk Management" (2009)[URL]
  40. Strack, Fritz, "Explaining the Enigmatic Anchoring Effect : Mechanisms of Selective Accessibility", Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 73, pp.437~446 (1997)
  41. Tversky, Amos, "Judgment under Uncertainty : Heuristics and Biases", Science, 185, pp.1124~1131 (1974)
  42. Cognitive Biases Potentially Affecting Judgment of Global Risks, "Yudkowsky, Eliezer", Singularity Institute for Artificial Intelligence Working Paper, ~ (2006)

관련 논문AI추천

프레이밍효과에 따른 종신연금 가입의사주소현한국소비문화학회 · 소비문화연구2012 · 제15권 제4호효과적인 퇴직연금 상품 운용을 유도하기 위한 행태 경제 실험 설계김덕규, 김상현, 신은철, 하슬아금융감독원 · 금융감독연구2019 · 제6권 제2호국내 연금화 발생 요인에 대한 실증분석성주호, 이봉주, 이상민경영연구원 · 의료경영학연구2024 · 제18권 제4호은퇴자산의 연금화와 최적 소비경로지홍민, 채원영이화사회과학원 · 사회과학연구논총2018 · 제34권 제1호건강, 수명, 은퇴에 대한 주관적 관점이 개인연금 수요에 미치는 영향김선애, 손지훈, 윤상용한국리스크관리학회 · 리스크관리연구2021 · 제32권 제1호즉시연금 수요에 관한 연구: 퇴직 공무원 및 퇴직예정 공무원을 중심으로백은영한국소비자학회 · 소비자학연구2013 · 제24권 제2호

이 간행물의 다른 논문 (7건)

행동에 대한 비의식적 생각(nonconscious thoughts)이 구매를 이끈다: 총체적 행동 예열(general action priming)이 소비자의 선택보류(choice deferral)에 미치는 영향박종원, 김소현pp. 1-28충동구매 메커니즘에 관한 연구하승범, 서문식pp. 29-62소비자의 윤리의식, 짝퉁에 대한 소비자태도가 짝퉁구매행동에 미치는 영향 분석허경옥pp. 63-84녹색소비정책의 소비자지향성 비교 평가 연구신민경pp. 85-115소비자의 대형유통업체 영업규제에 대한 인식과 전통시장으로의 전환의도에 관한 연구정민지, 정재은pp. 117-146
원문 보기