AAFP (2015). https://timedotcom.files.wordpress.com/2015/05/2015_04_28_obama.pdfGoogle Scholar

Abdellaoui, M., L’Haridon, O., & Paraschiv, C. (2013). Do couples discount future consequences less than individuals? Université de Rennes 1 Working Paper 2013-20. Université De Rennes 1.Google Scholar

Abrams, B. A., & Schitz, M. D. (1978). The “crowding-out” effect of governmental transfers on private charitable contributions. Public Choice, 33(1), 29–39.Google Scholar

Academy of Nutrition and Dietetics. (2016). Evidence analysis manual: Steps in the academy evidence analysis process. Chicago, IL: American Dietetic Association. Retrieved from www.andeal.org/vault/2440/web/files/2016_April_EA_Manual.pdfGoogle Scholar

Achourioti, T., Fugard, A., & Stenning, K. (2011). Throwing the normative baby out with the prescriptivist bathwater. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 34(5), 249.Google Scholar

Action on Smoking and Health. (n.d.). E-cigarettes and the fight against tobacco. Retrieved from https://ash.org/programs/e-cigarettes-the-fight-against-tobaccoGoogle Scholar

Adler, J. H., Meiners, R. E., Morriss, A. P., & Yandle, B. (2015). Bootleggers, Baptists, and e-cigs. Regulation, 30–35. Retrieved from https://object.cato.org/sites/cato.org/files/serials/files/regulation/2015/3/regulation-v38n1-3.pdfGoogle Scholar

Adriani, F., & Sonderegger, S. (2014). Evolution of similarity judgements in intertemporal choice. Centre for Decision Research and Experimental Economics, School of Economics, University of Nottingham, Discussion Papers 2014-06. Nottingham, UK: University of Nottingham.Google Scholar

Agnew, J. R., & Szykman, L. R. (2005). Asset allocation and information overload: The influence of information display, asset choice, and investor experience. Journal of Behavioral Finance, 6(2), 57–70.Google Scholar

Ainslie, G. (1992). Picoeconomics: The strategic interaction of successive motivational states within the person. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Ainslie, G. (2001). Breakdown of will. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Ainslie, G. (2005). Précis of breakdown of will. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 28(5), 635–650.Google Scholar

Ainslie, G. (2012). Pure hyperbolic discount curves predict “eyes open” self-control. Theory and Decision, 73(1), 3–34.Google Scholar

Ainslie, G. (2016). The cardinal anomalies that led to behavioral economics: Cognitive or motivational? Managerial and Decision Economics, 37(4–5), 261–273.Google Scholar

Aldao, A. (2013). The future of emotion regulation research capturing context. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 8(2), 155–172.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Aldred, J. (2003). The money pump revisited. Risk Decision and Policy, 8(1), 59–76.Google Scholar

Aldred, J. (2007). Intransitivity and vague preferences. Journal of Ethics, 11(4), 377–403.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Alexander, B. (2010). Curb Your Enthusiasm’s Larry David. Time. Retrieved from http://content.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,1993876,00.htmlGoogle Scholar

Ali, S. N. (2011). Learning self-control. Quarterly Journal of Economics, 126(2), 857–893.Google Scholar

Allais, M. (1953). L’extension des théories de l’équilibre économique général et du rendement social au cas du risque. Econometrica, 29(2), 269–290.Google Scholar

Alpert, M., & Raiffa, H. (1982). A progress report on the training of probability assessors. In Kahneman, D., Slovic, P., & Tversky, A. (Eds.), Judgment under uncertainty: Heuristics and biases, 294–305. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

American Nonsmokers’ Rights Foundation. (2017). 100% Smokefree U.S. Retrieved from https://no-smoke.org/wp-content/uploads/pdf/100smokefreeairports.pdfGoogle Scholar

Anand, P. (1995). Foundations of rational choice under risk. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar

Anderson, C., & Brion, S. (2010). Overconfidence and the attainment of status in groups. IRLE Working Paper No. 215-10. Institute for Research on Labor and Employment. Retrieved from http://irle.berkeley.edu/files/2010/Overconfidence-and-the-Attainment-of-Status-in-Groups.pdfGoogle Scholar

Anderson, C. J., Bahník, S., Barnett-Cowan, M., Bosco, F. A., Chandler, J., Chartier, C. A., … & Zuni, K. (2016). Response to comment on “Estimating the reproducibility of psychological science.” Science, 351(6277), 1037.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Andrade, E. B., & Cohen, J. B. (2007). Affect-based evaluation of regulation as mediators of behavior: The role of affect in risk taking, helping and eating patterns. Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=928926Google Scholar

Angeletos, G. M., Laibson, D., Repetto, A., Tobacman, J., & Weinberg, S. (2001). The hyperbolic consumption model: Calibration, simulation, and empirical evaluation. Journal of Economic Perspectives, 15(3), 47–68.Google Scholar

Angner, E. (2006). Economists as experts: Overconfidence in theory and practice. Journal of Economic Methodology, 13(1), 1–24.Google Scholar

Antoñanzas, F., Viscusi, W. K., Rovira, J., Braña, F. J., Portillo, F., & Carvalho, I. (2000). Smoking risks in Spain: Part I – Perception of risks to the smoker. Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, 21(2–3), 161–186.Google Scholar

Aon Hewitt. (2015). Hot topics in retirement. Retrieved from www.aon.com/attachments/human-capital-consulting/hot-topics-retirement-2015.pdfGoogle Scholar

Arad, A., & Rubinstein, A. (2018). The people’s perspective on libertarian-paternalistic policies. Journal of Law and Economics, 61(2), 311–333.Google Scholar

Ariely, D. (2008). Predictably irrational: The hidden forces that shape our decisions. New York: Harper.Google Scholar

Ariely, D., & Wertenbroch, K. (2002). Procrastination, deadlines and performance: Self-control by precommitment. Psychological Science, 13(3), 219–224.Google Scholar

Ariely, D., Loewenstein, G., & Prelec, D. (2003). “Coherent arbitrariness”: Stable demand curves without stable preferences. Quarterly Journal of Economics, 118(1), 73–106.Google Scholar

Arkes, H. R., Gigerenzer, G., & Hertwig, R. (2016). How bad is incoherence? Decision, 3(1), 20–39.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Arlen, J., Spitzer, M., & Talley, E. (2002). Endowment effects within corporate agency relationships. Journal of Legal Studies, 31(1), 1–37.Google Scholar

Arrow, K. J. (2012 [1951]). Social choice and individual values. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.Google Scholar

Arrow, K. J. (1959). Rational choice functions and orderings. Economica, 26(102), 121–127.Google Scholar

Arrow, K. J., & Debreu, G. (1954). Existence of an equilibrium for a competitive economy. Econometrica: Journal of the Econometric Society, 22(3), 265–290.Google Scholar

Augenblick, N., Niederle, M., & Sprenger, C. (2015). Working over time: Dynamic inconsistency in real effort tasks. Quarterly Journal of Economics, 130(3), 1067–1115.Google Scholar

Aumann, R. J. (1962). Utility theory without the completeness axiom. Econometrica, 30(3), 445–462.Google Scholar

Baillon, A., Bleichrodt, H., Liu, N., & Wakker, P. P. (2015). Group decision rules and group rationality under risk. www.aurelienbaillon.com/research/papers/pdf/group.pdfGoogle Scholar

Baillon, A., Bleichrodt, H., & Spinu, V. (2017). Searching for the reference point. Erasmus School of Economics, Erasmus University Rotterdam, The Netherlands, working paper. Available at https://personal.eur.nl/bleichrodt/Baillon_Bleichrodt_Spinu_2017_05_23.pdfGoogle Scholar

Baker, M. (2016). Psychology’s reproducibility problem is exaggerated – say psychologists. Retrieved from www.nature.com/news/psychology-s-reproducibility-problem-is-exaggerated-say-psychologists-1.19498Google Scholar

Balakrishnan, U., Haushofer, J., & Jakiela, P. (2017). How soon is now? Evidence of present bias from convex time budget experiments. NBER No. w23558. National Bureau of Economic Research.Google Scholar

Bandura, A., & Perloff, B. (1967). Relative efficacy of self-monitored and externally imposed reinforcement systems. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 7(2), 111–116.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Bandura, A., & Schunk, D. H. (1981). Cultivating competence, self-efficacy and intrinsic interest through proximal self-motivation. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 41(3), 586–598.Google Scholar

Barendregt, J. J., Bonneux, L., & van der Maas, P. J. (1997). The health care costs of smoking. New England Journal of Medicine, 337(15), 1052–1057. Retrieved from www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJM199710093371506Google Scholar

Bargh, J. A. (1994). The four horsemen of automaticity: Awareness, intention, efficiency, and control in social cognition. In Wyer, R. S. Jr. & Srull, T. K. (Eds.), Handbook of social cognition: Basic processes; Applications, 1–40. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar

Bar-Gill, O. (2004). Seduction by plastic. Northwestern Law Review, 98(4), 1373–1434.Google Scholar

Bar-Gill, O. (2012). Seduction by contract. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar

Bar-Gill, O. (2014). Consumer transactions. In Zamir, E. & Teichman, D. (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of behavioral economics and the law, 465–490. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar

Bastiat, F. (1995). Selected essays on political economy. Edited by de Huszar, G. B.. Irvington-on-Hudson, NY: Foundation for Economic Education. Retrieved from www.econlib.org/library/Bastiat/basEss1.htmlGoogle Scholar

Bates, C. (2018). Tobacco control and the tobacco industry: A failure of understanding and imagination. Retrieved from www.clivebates.com/tobacco-control-and-the-tobacco-industry-a-failure-of-understanding-and-imagination/Google Scholar

Baumeister, R. F., Gailliot, M., DeWall, C. N., & Oaten, M. (2006). Self‐regulation and personality: How interventions increase regulatory success, and how depletion moderates the effects of traits on behavior. Journal of Personality, 74(6), 1773–1802.Google Scholar

Becker, G. S. (1965). A theory of the allocation of time. Economic Journal, 75(299), 493–517.Google Scholar

Becker, G. S. (2007). Libertarian paternalism: A critique – Becker [Blog post]. Retrieved from www.becker-posner-blog.com/2007/01/libertarian-paternalism-a-critique--becker.htmlGoogle Scholar

Becker, G. S., & Rubinstein, Y. (2004). Fear and the response to terrorism: An economic analysis. http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.556.5346&rep=rep1&type=pdfGoogle Scholar

Bell, D., Raiffa, H., & Tversky, A. (1988). Decision making: Descriptive, normative, and prescriptive interactions. New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Benjamin, D. K., & Dougan, W. R. (1997). Individuals’ estimates of the risks of death: Part I – A reassessment of the previous evidence. Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, 15(2), 115–133.Google Scholar

Benjamin, D. K., Dougan, W. R, & Buschena, D. (2001). Individuals’ estimates of the risks of death: Part II – New evidence. Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, 22(1), 35–57.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Ben-Shahar, O., & Posner, E. A. (2011). The right to withdraw in contract law. Journal of Legal Studies, 40(1), 115–148.Google Scholar

Berg, N., Eckel, C., & Johnson, C. (2010). Inconsistency pays? Time-inconsistent subjects and EU violators earn more. MPRA Paper 26589. Munich, Germany: University Library of Munich.Google Scholar

Berggren, N. (2012). Time for behavioral political economy? An analysis of articles in behavioral economics. Review of Austrian Economics, 25(3), 199–221.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Bergstrom, T., Blume, L., & Varian, H. (1986). On the private provision of public goods. Journal of Public Economics, 29(1), 25–49.Google Scholar

Bernheim, B. D. (1986). On the voluntary and involuntary provision of public goods. American Economic Review, 76(4), 789–793.Google Scholar

Bernheim, B. D. (2009). Behavioral welfare economics. Journal of the European Economic Association, 7(2–3), 267–319.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Bernheim, B. D. (2016). The good, the bad, and the ugly: A unified approach to behavioral welfare economics. Journal of Benefit–Cost Analysis, 7(1), 12–68.Google Scholar

Bernheim, B. D., & Rangel, A. (2007). Behavioral public economics: Welfare and policy analysis with nonstandard decision-makers. In Diamond, P. & Vartiainen, H. (Eds.), Behavioral economics and its applications, 7–77. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar

Bernheim, B. D., Fradkin, A., & Popov, I. (2015). The welfare economics of default options in 401(k) plans. American Economic Review, 105(9), 2798–2837.Google Scholar

Besharov, G. (2004). Second-best considerations in correcting cognitive biases. Southern Economic Journal, 71(1), 12–20.Google Scholar

Beshears, J., Choi, J. J., Laibson, D., & Madrian, B. C. (2008). How are preferences revealed? Journal of Public Economics, 92(8), 1787–1794.Google Scholar

Beshears, J., Choi, J. J., Laibson, D., & Madrian, B. C. (2009). The importance of default options for retirement saving outcomes. In Brown, J., Liebman, J., & Wise, D. A. (Eds.), Social Security policy in a changing environment, 167–199. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar

Beshears, J., Choi, J. J., Laibson, D., & Madrian, B. C. (2018). Potential vs. realized savings under automatic enrolment. TIAA Institute Research Dialogue No. 148. TIAA Institute.Google Scholar

Beshears, J., Choi, J. J., Laibson, D., Madrian, B. C., & Wang, S. Y. (2015). Who is easier to nudge? Paper presented at the 17th Annual Joint Meeting of the Retirement Research Consortium, Washington, DC. Retrieved from www.nber.org/programs/ag/rrc/rrc2015/papers/7.3%20-%20Beshears,%20Choi,%20Laibson,%20Madrian,%20Wang.pdfGoogle Scholar

Beshears, J., Choi, J. J., Laibson, D., Madrian, B. C., & Wang, S. Y. (2016). Who is easier to nudge. Unpublished. Retrieved from http://scholar.harvard.edu/files/laibson/files/who_is_easier_to_nudge_2016.05.27.pdfGoogle Scholar

Beshears, J., Choi, J. J., Laibson, D., Madrian, B. C., & Skimmyhorn, W. L. (2017). Borrowing to save? The impact of automatic enrollment on debt. Unpublished manuscript. Retrieved from https://scholar.harvard.edu/files/laibson/files/total_savings_impact_2017_12_06.pdf.Google Scholar

Bhargava, S., & Loewenstein, G. (2015). Behavioral economics and public policy 102: Beyond nudging. American Economic Review, 105(5), 396–401.Google Scholar

Binmore, K. (2009). Rational decisions. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar

Birnbaum, M. H. (1983). Base rates in Bayesian inference: Signal detection analysis of the cab problem. American Journal of Psychology, 96(1), 85–94.Google Scholar

Blais, B., & Dion, S. (Eds.). (1991). The budget-maximizing bureaucrat: Appraisal and evidence. Pittsburgh, PA: University of Pittsburgh Press.Google Scholar

Bleichrodt, H., Gao, Y., & Rohde, K. I. (2016). A measurement of decreasing impatience for health and money. Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, 52(3), 213–231.Google Scholar

Blumenthal, J. A. (2005). Law and the emotions: The problems of affective forecasting. Indiana Law Journal, 80, 155–238.Google Scholar

Blundell, J. E., Stubbs, R. J., Golding, C., Croden, F., Alam, R., Whybrow, S., … & Lawton, C. L. (2005). Resistance and susceptibility to weight gain: Individual variability in response to a high-fat diet. Physiology & Behavior, 86(5), 614–622.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Bogenschneider, K., & Corbett, T. (2010). Evidence-based policymaking: Insights from policy-minded researchers and research-minded policymakers. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar

Böhm-Bawerk, E. von (1959 [1889]). Capital and interest: Positive theory of capital, Vol. 2. Translated by Huncke, G. D.. South Holland, IL: Libertarian Press.Google Scholar

Bollinger, B., Leslie, P., & Sorensen, A. (2011). Calorie posting in chain restaurants. American Economic Journal: Economic Policy, 3(1), 91–128.Google Scholar

Bonnie, R. J., Stratton, K., & Wallace, R. B. (2007). Ending the tobacco problem: A blueprint for the nation. Washington, DC: National Academies Press.Google Scholar

Bonta, D. (2007). Clean air laws. In Bonnie, R. J., Stratton, K., & Wallace, R. B. (Eds.)., Ending the tobacco problem: A blueprint for the nation, 423–434. Washington, DC: National Academies Press.Google Scholar

Bonta, D., & Permanente, K. (2007). Appendix B: Clear air laws. In Bonnie, R. J., Stratton, K., & Wallace, R. B. (Eds.), Ending the tobacco problem: A blueprint for the nation, B1–B9. Washington, DC: National Academies Press.Google Scholar

Bordalo, P., Gennaioli, N., & Shleifer, A. (2013). Salience and consumer choice. Journal of Political Economy, 121(5), 803–843.Google Scholar

Borges, M. C., Louzada, M. L., de Sá, T. H., Laverty, A. A., Parra, D. C., Garzillo, J. M. F., … & Millett, C. (2017). Artificially sweetened beverages and the response to the global obesity crisis. PLoS Medicine, 14(1), e1002195.Google Scholar

Bornstein, R. F. (1989). Exposure and affect: Overview and meta-analysis of research, 1968–1987. Psychological Bulletin, 106(2), 265–289.Google Scholar

Boyles, S. (2018). ACS: E-cigarettes OK for smoking cessation … with caveats. MedPage Today. Retrieved from www.medpagetoday.com/pulmonology/smoking/71315Google Scholar

Bradford, D., Courtemanche, C., Heutel, G., McAlvanah, P., & Ruhm, C. (2017). Time preferences and consumer behavior. Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, 55(2–3), 119–145.Google Scholar

Bremzen, A., Khokhlova, E., Suvorov, A., & Van de Ven, J. (2015). Bad news: An experimental study on the informational effects of rewards. Review of Economics and Statistics, 97(1), 55–70.Google Scholar

Brighton, H., & Gigerenzer, G. (2012). Are rational actor models “rational” outside small worlds? In Okasha, S. & Binmore, K. (Eds.), Evolution and rationality: Decisions, co-operation and strategic behavior, 84–109. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Britton, J., & Bogdanovica, I. (2014). Electronic cigarettes. Public Health England. Retrieved from https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/311887/Ecigarettes_report.pdfGoogle Scholar

Broome, J. (1999). Ethics out of economics. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Brown, J. R., Farrell, A. M., & Weisbenner, S. J. (2012). The downside of defaults. NBER No. onb12–05. National Bureau of Economic Research.Google Scholar

Brown, J. R., Farrell, A. M., & Weisbenner, S. J. (2016). Decision-making approaches and the propensity to default: Evidence and implications. Journal of Financial Economics, 121(3), 477–495.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Browning, E. K. (1999). The myth of fiscal externalities. Public Finance Review, 27(1), 3–18.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Brunnermeier, M. K., & Parker, J. A. (2005). Optimal expectations. American Economic Review, 95(4), 1092–1118.Google Scholar

Bryner, G. C. (1987). Bureaucratic discretion: Law and policy in federal regulatory agencies. Oxford, UK: Pergamon Press.Google Scholar

Buchanan, J. M. (1954). Social choice, democracy, and free markets. Journal of Political Economy, 62(2), 114–123.Google Scholar

Buchanan, J. M. (1969). Cost and choice. Chicago, IL: Markham.Google Scholar

Buchanan, J. M. (1979). Natural and artifactual man. In Buchanan, J. M. (Ed.), What should economists do?, 93–112. Indianapolis, IN: Liberty Fund.Google Scholar

Buchanan, J. M. (1982). Order defined in the process of its emergence. Literature of Liberty, 5(4), 5–18.Google Scholar

Buchanan, J. M. (2005). Afraid to be free: Dependency as desideratum. In Shughart, W. F. & Tollison, R. D. (Eds.), Policy challenges and political responses, 19–31. Boston, MA: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Buchanan, J., & Brennan, G. (1985). The reason of rules: Constitutional political economy. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Bucher, T., Collins, C., Rollo, M. E., McCaffrey, T. A., De Vlieger, N., Van der Bend, D. … & Perez-Cueto, F. J. A. (2016). Nudging consumers towards healthier choices: A systematic review of positional influences on food choice. British Journal of Nutrition, 115(12), 2252–2263.Google Scholar

Burke, J., Hung, A. A., & Luoto, J. E. (2015). Automatic enrollment in retirement savings vehicles. RAND Labor & Population Working Paper. RAND Corporation.Google Scholar

Burkett, J. P. (2006). Microeconomics: Optimization, experiments, and behavior. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar

Burstyn, I. (2013). Peering through the mist: What does the chemistry of contaminants in electronic cigarettes tell us about health risks. Philadelphia, PA: Department of Environmental and Occupational Health, School of Public Health, Drexel University.Google Scholar

Buss, F. T., & Rüschendorf, L. (2010). On the perception of time. Gerontology, 56(4), 361–370.Google Scholar

Butrica, B., & Karamcheva, N. (2012). Automatic enrollment, employee compensation, and retirement security. Boston, MA: Center for Retirement Research at Boston College.Google Scholar

Butrica, B. A., & Karamcheva, N. S. (2015a). Automatic enrollment, employer match rates, and employee compensation in 401(k) plans. Monthly Labor Review, 138, 1–33.Google Scholar

Butrica, B. A., & Karamcheva, N. S. (2015b). The relationship between automatic enrollment and DC plan contributions: Evidence from a national survey of older workers. Center for Retirement Research at Boston College.Google Scholar

Byrne, S., & Hart, P. S. (2009). The boomerang effect: A synthesis of findings and a preliminary theoretical Framework. Annals of the International Communication Association, 33(1), 3–37.Google Scholar

Camerer, C. F. (2015). The promise and success of lab-field generalizability in experimental economics: A critical reply to Levitt and List. In Frechette, G. R. & Schotter, A. (Eds.), Handbook of experimental economic methodology, 249–295. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar

Camerer, C. F. (2000). Prospect theory in the wild: Evidence from the field. In Kahneman, D. & Tversky, A. (Eds.), Choices, values, and frames, 288–300. New York: Russell Sage Foundation.Google Scholar

Camerer, C. F., & Hogarth, R. M. (1999). The effects of financial incentives in experiments: A review and capital-labor-production framework. Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, 19(1–3), 7–42.Google Scholar

Camerer, C. F., & Hogarth, R. M. (1999). The effects of financial incentives in experiments: A review and capital-labor-production framework. Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, 19(1–3), 7–42.Google Scholar

Camerer, C. F., Issacharoff, S., Loewenstein, G., O’Donoghue, T., & Rabin, M. (2003). Regulation for conservatives: Behavioral economics and the case for “asymmetric paternalism.” University of Pennsylvania Law Review, 151(3), 1211–1254.Google Scholar

Camerer, C. F., Dreber, A., Forsell, E., Ho, T. H., Huber, J., Johannesson, M., … & Heikensten, E. (2016). Evaluating replicability of laboratory experiments in economics. Science, 351(6280), 1433–1436.Google Scholar

Camerer, C. F., Dreber, A., Holzmeister, F., Ho, T. H., Huber, J., Johannesson, M., … & Altmejd, A. (2018). Evaluating the replicability of social science experiments in Nature and Science between 2010 and 2015. Nature Human Behaviour, 2(9), 637.Google Scholar

Campaign for Tobacco-Free Kids. (2006). Smoke-free laws encourage smokers to quit and discourage youth from starting [Press release]. Retrieved from www.tobaccofreekids.org/research/factsheets/pdf/0198.pdfGoogle Scholar

Canadian Cancer Society. (2016). Cigarette package health warnings: International status report. Retrieved from www.cancer.ca/~/media/cancer.ca/CW/for%20media/Media%20releases/2018/CCS-international-warnings-report-2018---English---2-MB.pdf?la=en.Google Scholar

Capa, R. L., Bustin, G. M., Cleeremans, A., & Hansenne, M. (2011). Conscious and unconscious reward cues can affect a critical component of executive control. Experimental Psychology, 58(5), 370–375.Google Scholar

Caplan, B. (2000). Rational irrationality: A framework for the neoclassical-behavioral debate. Eastern Economic Journal, 26(2), 191–211.Google Scholar

Caplan, B. (2007). The myth of the rational voter. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar

Carlin, B. I., Gervais, S., & Manso, G. (2013). Libertarian paternalism, information production, and financial decision making. Review of Financial Studies, 26(9), 2204–2228.Google Scholar

Carlsson, F., He, H., Martinsson, P., Qin, P., & Sutter, M. (2012). Household decision making in rural China: Using experiments to estimate the influences of spouses. Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, 84(2), 525–536.Google Scholar

Carroll, G. D., Choi, J. J., Laibson, D., Madrian, B. C., & Metrick, A. (2009). Optimal defaults and active decisions. Quarterly Journal of Economics, 124(4), 1639–1674.Google Scholar

Cartwright, E. (2011). Behavioral economics. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar

Cartwright, N. (2009). Evidence-based policy: What is to be done about relevance? Philosophical Studies, 143, 127–136.Google Scholar

Castillo, M., Petrie, R., & Torero, M. (2008). Rationality and the nature of the market. Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=1265015Google Scholar

Cecchi, F., & Bulte, E. (2013). Does market experience promote rational choice? Experimental evidence from rural Ethiopia. Economic Development and Cultural Change, 61, 407–429.Google Scholar

Center for Science in the Public Interest. (2014). Support the SWEET Act. Retrieved from http://action.cspinet.org/ea-action/action?ea.client.id=1927&ea.campaign.id=34422Google Scholar

Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. (2000). Strategies for reducing exposure to environmental tobacco smoke, increasing tobacco-use cessation, and reducing initiation in communities and health-care systems: A report on the recommendations of the task force on community preventive services. Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report, 49(RR-12).Google Scholar

Cevolani, C., Crupi, V., & Festa, R. (2010). The whole truth about Linda: Probability, verisimilitude, and a paradox of conjunction. In D’Agostino, M., Laudisa, F., Giorello, G., Pievani, T., & Sinigaglia, C. (Eds.), New essays in logic and the philosophy of science, 603–615. London, UK: College Publications.Google Scholar

Charness, G., Karni, E., & Levin, D. (2007). Individual and group decision making under risk: An experimental study of Bayesian updating and violations of first-order stochastic dominance. Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, 35, 129–148.Google Scholar

Charness, G., Karni, E., & Levin, D. (2010). On the conjunction fallacy in probability judgment: New experimental evidence regarding Linda. Games and Economic Behavior, 68(2), 551–556.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Charness, G., Gneezy, U., & Kuhn, M. A. (2012). Experimental methods: Between-subject and within-subject design. Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, 81(1), 1–8.Google Scholar

Chater, N., & Oaksford, M. (1999). The probability heuristics model of syllogistic reasoning. Cognitive Psychology, 38(2), 191–258.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Chesterley, N. (2017). Defaults, decision costs and welfare in behavioural policy design. Economica, 84(333), 16–33.Google Scholar

Chia, C. W., Shardell, M., Tanaka, T., Liu, D. D., Gravenstein, K. S., Simonsick, E. M., … & Ferrucci, L. (2016). Chronic low-calorie sweetener use and risk of abdominal obesity among older adults: A cohort study. PloS One, 11(11), e0167241.Google Scholar

Chiu, S., Bergeron, N., Williams, P. T., Bray, G. A., Sutherland, B., & Krauss, R. M. (2016). Comparison of the DASH (Dietary Approaches to Stop Hypertension) diet and a higher-fat DASH diet on blood pressure and lipids and lipoproteins: A randomized controlled trial. American Journal of Clinical Nutrition, 103(2), 341–347.Google Scholar

Choi, J. J. (2015). Contributions to defined contribution pension plans. Annual Review of Financial Economics, 7, 161–178.Google Scholar

Choi, J. J., Laibson, D., Madrian, B. C., & Metrick, A. (2002). Defined contribution pensions: Plan rules, participant choices, and the path of least resistance. Tax Policy and the Economy, 16, 67–113.Google Scholar

Choi, J. J., Laibson, D., Madrian, B. C., & Metrick, A. (2003). Optimal defaults. American Economic Review, 93(2), 180–185.Google Scholar

Choi, J. J., Laibson, D., Madrian, B. C., & Metrick, A. (2003). For better or for worse: Default effects and 401 (k) savings behavior. In Perspectives on the economics of aging (pp. 81–126). University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar

Cohen, J. D., Ericson, K. M., Laibson, D., & White, J. M. (2016). Measuring time preferences. NBER No. w22455. National Bureau of Economic Research.Google Scholar

Cohen, L. J. (1981). Can human irrationality be experimentally demonstrated? Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 4(3), 317–331.Google Scholar

Colgrove, J., & Bayer, R. (2002). Science, politics, and ideology in the campaign against environmental tobacco smoke. American Journal of Public Health, 92(6), 949–954.Google Scholar

Collodi, C. (2016). Pinnochio [E-reader version]. (Original work published 1883)Google Scholar

Conly, S. (2012). Against autonomy: Justifying coercive paternalism. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Conly, S. (2013). Against autonomy: Justifying coercive paternalism [Kindle edition]. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.Google ScholarPubMed

Corner, A., Hahn, U., & Oaksford, M. (2011). The psychological mechanism of the slippery slope argument. Journal of Memory and Language, 64(2), 133–152.Google Scholar

Costello, F. (2009). How probability theory explains the conjunction fallacy. Journal of Behavioral Decision Making, 22(3), 213–234.Google Scholar

Costello, F., & Watts, P. (2014). Surprisingly rational: Probability theory plus noise explains biases in judgment. Psychological Review, 121(3), 463–480.Google Scholar

Cowen, T. (1991). Self-constraint versus self-liberation. Ethics, 101(2), 360–373.Google Scholar

Craver, R. (2014). Reynolds American wants FDA to ban vapor e-cigs. Winston-Salem Journal, September 7. Retrieved from www.journalnow.com/business/business_news/local/big-tobacco-makers-want-fda-to-ban-vapor-e-cigs/article_77b131f5-540d-5f02-927c-733bac751529.htmlGoogle Scholar

Cremer, H., De Donder, P., Maldonado, D., & Pestieau, P. (2012). Taxing sin goods and subsidizing health care. Scandinavian Journal of Economics, 114, 101–123.Google Scholar

Crupi, V., Fitelson, B., & Tentori, K. (2008). Probability, confirmation, and the conjunction fallacy. Thinking & Reasoning, 14(2), 182–199.Google Scholar

Csete, J., Kamarulzaman, A., Kazatchkine, M., Altice, F., Balicki, M., Buxton, J., … & Hart, C. (2016). Public health and international drug policy. The Lancet, 387(10026), 1427–1480.Google Scholar

Damasio, A. (1994). Descartes’ error: Emotion, reason and the human brain. New York: Avon Books.Google Scholar

Dawes, R. M., & Mulford, M. (1996). The false consensus effect and overconfidence: Flaws in judgment or flaws in how we study judgment? Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 65(3), 201–211.Google Scholar

De Finetti, B. (1964). Foresight: Its logical laws in subjective sources. In Kyburg, H. & Smokler, H. (Eds.), Studies in subjective probability, 93–158. New York: John Wiley.Google Scholar

De Finetti, B. (1974a). Theory of probability: A critical introductory treatment. Translated by A. Machi & A. Smith. Chichester, UK: J. Wiley.Google Scholar

De Finetti, B. (1974b). The true subjective probability problem. In C.-A. Von-Holstein, (Ed.), The concept of probability in psychological experiments, 15–23. Dordrecht, Netherlands: Springer.Google Scholar

De Finetti, B. (2008). Philosophical lectures on probability. Berlin, Germany: Springer-Verlag.Google Scholar

de Ridder, D., Lensvelt-Mulders, G., Finkenauer, C., Stok, M., & Baumeister, R. F. (2012). Taking stock of self-control: A meta-analysis of how self-control affects a wide range of behaviors. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 16(1), 76–99.Google Scholar

de Sousa, R. (1987). The rationality of emotion. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar

Dean, M., Kıbrıs, Ö., & Masatlioglu, Y. (2017). Limited attention and status quo bias. Journal of Economic Theory, 169, 93–127.Google Scholar

Debnam, J. (2017). Selection effects and heterogeneous demand responses to the Berkeley soda tax vote. American Journal of Agricultural Economics, 99(5), 1172–1187.Google Scholar

Debreu, G. (1954). Representation of a preference ordering by a numerical function. Decision Processes, 3, 159–165.Google Scholar

DellaVigna, S., & Malmendier, U. (2006). Paying not to go to the gym. American Economic Review, 96(3), 694–719.Google Scholar

Demsetz, H. (1969). Information and efficiency: Another viewpoint. Journal of Law and Economics, 12(1), 1–22.Google Scholar

Denant-Boemont, L., Diecidue, E., & l’Haridon, O. (2017). Patience and time consistency in collective decisions. Experimental Economics 20(1), 181–208.Google Scholar

Desvousges, W. H., Johnson, F. R., Dunford, R. W., Hudson, S. P., Wilson, K. N., & Boyle, K. J. (1993). Measuring natural resource damages with contingent valuation: Tests of validity and reliability. In Hausman, J. A. (Ed.), Contingent valuation: A critical assessment, 91–164. Amsterdam, Netherlands: North-Holland.Google Scholar

Dorausch, M. (n.d.). Studies reveal health risks of e-cigarettes. Retrieved from www.iflscience.com/health-and-medicine/studies-reveal-health-risks-e-cigarettesGoogle Scholar

Downs, A. (1957). An economic theory of political action in a democracy. Journal of Political Economy, 65(2), 135–150.Google Scholar

Duckworth, A. L., Gendler, T. S., & Gross, J. J. (2016). Situational strategies for self-control. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 11(1), 35–55.Google Scholar

Dulany, D. E., & Hilton, D. J. (1991). Conversational implicature, conscious representation, and the conjunction fallacy. Social Cognition, 9(1), 85–110.Google Scholar

Eitam, B., Hassin, R. R., & Schul, Y. (2008). Nonconscious goal pursuit in novel environments: The case of implicit learning. Psychological Science, 19(3), 261–267.Google Scholar

Elster, J. (1984). Ulysses and the sirens: Studies in rationality and irrationality (Rev. ed.). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Emery, S. L., Szczypka, G., Abril, E. P., Kim, Y., & Vera, L. (2014). Are you scared yet? Evaluating fear appeal messages in tweets about the tips campaign. Journal of Communication, 64(2), 278–295.Google Scholar

Encyclopedia of Mind Disorders. (n.d.). Self-control strategies. Retrieved from http://www.minddisorders.com/Py-Z/Self-control-strategies.htmlGoogle Scholar

Erev, I., Wallsten, T. S., & Budescu, D. V. (1994). Simultaneous over- and underconfidence: The role of error in judgment processes. Psychological Review, 101(3), 519–527.Google Scholar

Ericson, K. M. M., & Fuster, A. (2014). The endowment effect. Annual Review of Economics, 6(1), 555–579.Google Scholar

Ericson, K. M. M., White, J. M., Laibson, D., & Cohen, J. D. (2015). Money earlier or later? Simple heuristics explain intertemporal choices better than delay discounting does. Psychological Science, 26(6), 826–833.Google Scholar

Eswaran, M., & Neary, H. M. (2016). The evolutionary logic of honoring sunk costs. Economic Inquiry, 52, 835–846.Google Scholar

Evans, J. (2002). Logic and human reasoning: An assessment of the deduction paradigm. Psychological Bulletin, 128(6), 978–996.Google Scholar

Evans, J. S. B. T. (2012). Dual process theories of deductive reasoning: Facts and fallacies. In Holyoak, K. J. & Morrison, R. G. (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of thinking and reasoning, 115–133. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar

Evans, J. S. B., & Stanovich, K. E. (2013a). Dual-process theories of higher cognition: Advancing the debate. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 8(3), 223–241.Google Scholar

Evans, J. S. B., & Stanovich, K. E. (2013b). Theory and metatheory in the study of dual processing: Reply to comments. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 8(3), 263–271.Google Scholar

Fang, H., & Silverman, D. (2006). Distinguishing between cognitive biases. In McCaffery, E. J. & Slemrod, J. (Eds.), Behavioral public finance, 47–81. New York: Russell Sage Foundation.Google Scholar

Ferguson, A. (2010). Nudge nudge, wink wink. Weekly Standard, April 19. Retrieved from www.weeklystandard.com/nudge-nudge-wink-wink/article/433737#!Google Scholar

Fernandez-Villaverde, J., & Mukherji, A. (2002). Can we really observe hyperbolic discounting? Unpublished manuscript, University of Pennsylvania. Retrieved from http://economics.sas.upenn.edu/~jesusfv/hyper2006.pdfGoogle Scholar

Feynman, R. P. (1965). The character of physical law. London, UK: Cox and Wyman.Google Scholar

Fich, E. M., & Xu, G. (2018). Are market reactions to M&As biased by overextrapolation of salient news? Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=2996714 or http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2996714Google Scholar

Fiddick, L., Cosmides, L., & Tooby, J. (2000). No interpretation without representation: The role of domain-specific representations and inferences in the Wason selection task. Cognition, 77, 1–79.Google Scholar

Fiedler, K., & Krueger, J. I. (2012). More than an artifact: Regression as a theoretical construct. In Krueger, J. I. (Ed.), Social judgment and decision-making, 171–189. New York: Psychology Press.Google Scholar

Finch, C. (1993). Jim Henson: The works; The art, the magic, the imagination. London, UK: Random House.Google Scholar

FindLaw. (n.d.). Customer returns and refund laws by state. Retrieved from https://consumer.findlaw.com/consumer-transactions/customer-returns-and-refund-laws-by-state.htmlGoogle Scholar

Fischhoff, B. (2001). Learning from experience: Coping with hindsight bias and ambiguity. In Armstrong, J. S. (Ed.), Principles of forecasting: A handbook for researchers and practitioners, 543–554. Boston, MA: Kluwer.Google Scholar

Fishbach, A., & Shah, J. Y. (2006). Self-control in action: Implicit dispositions toward goals and away from temptations. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 90(5), 820–832.Google Scholar

Fishbach, A., & Shen, L. 2014. The explicit and implicit ways of overcoming temptation. In Sherman, J. W., Gawronski, B., & Trope, Y. (Eds.), Dual-process theories of the social mind, 454–467. New York: Guilford Press.Google Scholar

Fishbach, A., & Trope, Y. (2005). The substitutability of external control and self-control. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 41, 256–270.Google Scholar

Fishbach, A., Friedman, R. S., & Kruglanski, A. W. (2003). Leading us not into temptation: Momentary allurements elicit overriding goal activation. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 84(2), 296–309.Google Scholar

Fishbach, A., Dhar, R., & Zhang, Y. (2006). Subgoals as substitutes or complements: The role of goal accessibility. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 91(2), 232–242.Google Scholar

Fishbach, A., Zhang, Y., & Trope, Y. (2010). Counteractive evaluation: Asymmetric shifts in the implicit value of conflicting motivations. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 46(1), 29–38.Google Scholar

Fiske, S. T., & Taylor, S. E. (1991). Social cognition (2nd ed.). New York: McGraw-Hill.Google Scholar

Fitzsimons, G. M., & Bargh, J. A. (2004). Automatic self-regulation. In Baumeister, R. F. & Vohs, K. D. (Eds.), Handbook of self-regulation: Research, theory, and applications, 151–170. New York: Guilford Press.Google Scholar

Fitzsimons, G. M., & Finkel, E. J. (2010). Interpersonal influences on self-regulation. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 19(2), 101–105.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Fontaine, K. R., Redden, D. T., Wang, C., Westfall, A. O., & Allison, D. B. (2003). Years of life lost due to obesity. JAMA, 289(2), 187–193.Google Scholar

Frazão, E. (Ed.). (1999). America’s eating habits: Changes & consequences. Washington, DC: US Department of Agriculture, Economic Research Service.Google Scholar

Frechette, G. R., & Schotter, A. (2015). Handbook of experimental economic methodology. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar

Frederick, S., Loewenstein, G., & O’Donoghue, T. (2002). Time discounting and time preference: A critical review. Journal of Economic Literature, 40, 351–401.Google Scholar

Frederick, S., Loewenstein, G., & O’Donoghue, T. (2003). Time discounting and time preference: A critical review. In Loewenstein, G., Read, D., & Baumeister, R. (Eds.), Time and decision: Economic and psychological perspectives of intertemporal choice, 13–86. New York: Russell Sage Foundation.Google Scholar

Friedman, J. (2006). Democratic competence in normative and positive theory: Neglected implications of “The nature of belief systems in mass publics.” Critical Review, 18(1–3), i–xliii.Google Scholar

Friedman, M., & Savage, L. J. (1948). The utility analysis of choices involving risk. Journal of Political Economy, 56(4), 279–304.Google Scholar

Fujita, K. (2011). On conceptualizing self-control as more than the effortful inhibition of impulses. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 15(4), 352–366.Google Scholar

Fujita, K., & Carnevale, J. J. (2012). Transcending temptation through abstraction: The role of construal level in self-control. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 21(4), 248–252.Google Scholar

Gailliot, M. T., Plant, E. A., Butz, D. A., & Baumeister, R. F. (2007). Increasing self-regulatory strength can reduce the depleting effect of suppressing stereotypes. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 33(2), 281–294.Google Scholar

Gal, D., & Rucker, D. D. (2018). The loss of loss aversion: Will it loom larger than its gain? Journal of Consumer Psychology, 28(3), 497–516.Google Scholar

Galavotti, M. C. (2001). Subjectivism, objectivism and objectivity in Bruno de Finetti’s Bayesianism. In Corfield, D. & Williamson, J. (Eds.), Foundations of Bayesianism, 161–174. Dordrecht, Netherlands: Kluwer.Google Scholar

Galesic, M., Barkoczi, D., & Katsikopoulos, K. (2015). Can small crowds be wise? Moderate-sized groups can outperform large groups and individuals under some task conditions. Santa Fe Institute Working Paper. Retrieved from www.semanticscholar.org/paper/Can-Small-Crowds-Be-Wise-Moderate-sized-Groups-Can-Galesic-Barkoczi/af4e27a5367125b9fcab3da57ad418949edcd87d/pdfGoogle Scholar

Gass, R. H., & Seiter, J. S. (2015). Persuasion: Social influence and compliance gaining. 4th ed. Boston: Allyn & Bacon.Google Scholar

Gayer, T., & Viscusi, W. K.(2013). Overriding consumer preferences with energy regulations. Journal of Regulatory Economics, 43(3), 248–264.Google Scholar

Geyskens, K., Dewitte, S., Pandelaere, M., & Warlop, L. (2008). Tempt me just a little bit more: The effect of prior food temptation actionability on goal activation and consumption. Journal of Consumer Research, 35(4), 600–610.Google Scholar

Ghaffarzadegan, N., Lyneis, J., & Richardson, G. P. (2011). How small system dynamics models can help the public policy process. System Dynamics Review, 27(1), 22–44.Google Scholar

Gifford, A. Jr. (2002). Emotion and self-control. Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, 49, 113–130.Google Scholar

Gigerenzer, G. (1996). On narrow norms and vague heuristics: A reply to Kahneman and Tversky. Psychological Review, 103(3), 592–596.Google Scholar

Gigerenzer, G. (1998). Surrogates for theories. Theory & Psychology, 8(2), 195–204.Google Scholar

Gigerenzer, G. (2000). Adaptive thinking: Rationality in the real world. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar

Gigerenzer, G. (2008). I think, therefore I err. In Rationality for mortals: How people cope with uncertainty. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar

Gigerenzer, G. (2015). Simply rational: Decision making in the real world. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar

Gigerenzer, G., & Brighton, H. (2009). Homo heuristicus: Why biased minds make better inferences. Trends in Cognitive Science, 1, 107–143.Google Scholar

Gigerenzer, G., & Hug, K. (1992). Domain-specific reasoning: Social contracts, cheating and perspective change. Cognition, 43, 127–171.Google Scholar

Gigerenzer, G., & Marewski, J. N. (2015). Surrogate science: The idol of a universal method for scientific inference. Journal of Management, 41(2), 421–440.Google Scholar

Gigerenzer, G., & Murray, D. J. (1987). Cognition as intuitive statistics. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar

Gigerenzer, G., Hoffrage, U., & Kleinbölting, H. (1991). Probabilistic mental models: A Brunswikian theory of confidence. Psychological Review, 98(4), 506–528.Google Scholar

Gigerenzer, G., Hertwig, R., Hoffrage, U., & Sedlmeier, P. (2008). Cognitive illusions reconsidered. In Plott, C. R. & Smith, V. L. (Eds.), Handbook of experimental economics results, Vol. 1, 1018–1034. Amsterdam, Netherlands: Elsevier.Google Scholar

Gilbert, D. T., Pinel, E. C., Wilson, T. D., Blumberg, S. J., & Wheatley, T. P. (1998). Immune neglect: A source of durability bias in affective forecasting. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 75(3), 617.Google Scholar

Gilbert, D. T., King, G., Pettigrew, S., & Wilson, T. D. (2016). Comment on “Estimating the reproducibility of psychological science.” Science, 351(6277), 1037.Google Scholar

Gilboa, I. (2011). Making better decisions: Decision theory in practice. Chichester, UK: Wiley-Blackwell.Google Scholar

Giles, J., Coghlan, A., & Geddes, L. (2007). Anti-smoking groups accused of distorting the science on the risks of heart attack. New Scientist, 196(2629), 8.Google Scholar

Gintis, H. (2016). Individuality and entanglement: The moral and material bases of social life. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar

Glaeser, E. L. (2006). Paternalism and psychology. University of Chicago Law Review, 73(1), 133–156.Google Scholar

Glantz, S. A. (1987). Achieving a smokefree society. Circulation, 76(4), 746–752.Google Scholar

Gneezy, U., & Rustichini, A. (2000). Pay enough or don’t pay at all. Quarterly Journal of Economics, 115, 791–810.Google Scholar

Gneezy, U., Meier, S., & Rey-Biel, P. (2011). When and why incentives (don’t) work to modify behavior. Journal of Economic Perspectives, 25(4), 191–210.Google Scholar

Goda, G. S., Manchester, C. F., & Sojourner, A. J. (2014). What will my account really be worth? Experimental evidence on how retirement income projections affect saving. Journal of Public Economics, 119, 80–92.Google Scholar

Gokhale, J., Kotlikoff, L. J., & Neumann, T. (2001). Does participating in a 401(k) raise your lifetime taxes? NBER No. 8341. National Bureau of Economic Research.Google Scholar

Goldin, J. (2015). Which way to nudge: Uncovering preferences in the behavioral age. Yale Law Journal, 125, 226–270.Google Scholar

Grandy, R. E., & Warner, R. (2014). Paul Grice. In Zalta, E. N. (Ed.), The Stanford encyclopedia of philosophy. Retrieved from http://plato.stanford.edu/archives/spr2014/entries/grice/Google Scholar

Grandy, R. E., & Warner, R. (2017). Paul Grice. In E. Zalta (Ed.), The Stanford encyclopedia of philosophy. Stanford, CA: Metaphysics Research Lab, Stanford University. Retrieved from https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/win2017/entries/griceGoogle Scholar

Green, H. J. (1971). Consumer theory. Harmondsworth, UK: Penguin.Google Scholar

Gregory, R L. (Ed.). (2004). The Oxford companion to the mind, 2nd ed. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar

Grice, H. P. (1989). Studies in the way of words. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar

Grier, J. (2017). We used terrible science to justify smoking bans. Slate, February 13. Available at https://slate.com/technology/2017/02/secondhand-smoke-isnt-as-bad-as-we-thought.htmlGoogle Scholar

Grier, J. (2018). Scott Gottlieb’s FDA is moving toward a stealth ban on cigarettes and cigars. Reason, November 26. Available at http://reason.com/archives/2018/11/26/gottlieb-fda-vape-cigar-cigarette-banGoogle Scholar

Griffin, D., & Tversky, A. (1992). The weighing of evidence and the determinants of confidence. Cognitive Psychology, 24(3), 411–435.Google Scholar

Grimm, P. (2010). Social desirability bias. In Wiley international encyclopedia of marketing. In Sheth, J., Malhotra, N., & Price, L. L. (Eds.), 258. Oxford, UK: Wiley-Blackwell.Google Scholar

Gruber, J., & Köszegi, B. (2001). Is addiction “rational”? Theory and evidence. Quarterly Journal of Economics, 116(4), 1261–1303.Google Scholar

Grüne-Yanoff, T. (2015). Why behavioural policy needs mechanistic evidence. Economics and Philosophy, 32(3), 1–21.Google Scholar

Guido, G. (2001). The salience of marketing stimuli: An incongruity–salience hypothesis on consumer awareness. Boston, MA: Springer Science & Business Media.Google Scholar

Gul, F., & Pesendorfer, W. (2001). Temptation and self-control. Econometrica, 69(6), 1403–1435.Google Scholar

Gul, F., & Pesendorfer, W. (2004). Self-control and the theory of consumption. Econometrica, 72(1), 119–158.Google Scholar

Gul, F., & Pesendorfer, W. (2008). The case for mindless economics. In Caplin, A. & Schotter, A. (Eds.), The foundations of positive and normative economics, 3–39. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar

Guthrie, J. F., Derby, B. M., & Levy, A. S. (1999). What people know and do not know about nutrition. America’s eating habits: Changes and consequences. In Frazão, E. (Ed.), America’s eating habits: Changes & consequences, 243–290. Washington, DC: US Dept. of Agriculture, Economic Research Service.Google Scholar

Halevy, Y. (2015). Time consistency: Stationarity and time invariance. Econometrica, 83(1), 335–352.Google Scholar

Hall, K. D. (2017). A review of the carbohydrate–insulin model of obesity. European Journal of Clinical Nutrition, 71, 323–326.Google Scholar

Hall, K. D., Bemis, T., Brychta, R., Chen, K. Y., Courville, A., Crayner, , … & Yannai, L. (2015). Calorie for calorie, dietary fat restriction results in more body fat loss than carbohydrate restriction in people with obesity. Cell Metabolism, 22(3), 427–436. Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cmet.2015.07.021Google Scholar

Hall, K. D., Chen, K. Y., Guo, J., Lam, Y. Y., Leibel, R. L., Mayer, L. E., … & Ravussin, E. (2016). Energy expenditure and body composition changes after an isocaloric ketogenic diet in overweight and obese men. American Journal of Clinical Nutrition, 104(2), 324–333. Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.3945/ajcn.116.133561Google Scholar

Halpern, D. (2015). Inside the nudge unit: How small changes make a big difference. London, UK: W. H. Allen.Google Scholar

Halpern, D. (2016). Inside the nudge unit: How small changes can make a big difference. London, UK: Random House.Google Scholar

Hands, D. W. (2015). Normative rational choice theory: Past, present, and future. Unpublished. Available at SSRN: https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1738671Google Scholar

Harman, G. (2002). The internal critique. In Gabbay, D. M. (Ed.), Handbook of the logic of argument and inference: The turn towards the practical, 171–186. Amsterdam, Netherlands: Elsevier.Google Scholar

Harman, G. (2004). Practical aspects of theoretical rationality. In Mele, A. & Rawling, P. (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of rationality, 45–56. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar

Harrison, G. W. (1994). Expected utility theory and the experimentalists. Empirical Economics, 19, 223–253.Google Scholar

Harsanyi, J. C. (1982). Morality and the theory of rationality choice. In Sen, A. & Williams., B. (Eds.), Utilitarianism and beyond, 39–62. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Harvard University T.H. Chan School of Public Health. (n.d.). “Healthy Eating Plate.” www.hsph.harvard.edu/nutritionsource/healthy-eating-plate/13/.Google Scholar

Hassin, R. R., Bargh, J. A., Engell, A. D., & McCulloch, K. C. (2009). Implicit working memory. Consciousness and Cognition, 18(3), 665–678.Google Scholar

Hassin, R. R., Bargh, J. A., & Zimerman, S. (2009). Automatic and flexible: The case of nonconscious goal pursuit. Social Cognition, 27(1), 20–36.Google Scholar

Hausman, D. M. (2000). Revealed preference, belief, and game theory. Economics and Philosophy, 16(1), 99–115.Google Scholar

Hayek, F. A. (1945). The use of knowledge in society. American Economic Review, 35(4), 519–530.Google Scholar

Hayek, F. A. (1948). Individualism and economic order. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar

Hayek, F. A. (1955). The counter-revolution of science. Glencoe, IL: Free Press.Google Scholar

Hayek, F. A. (1975). The pretence of knowledge. Swedish Journal of Economics, 77(4), 433–442.Google Scholar

Healthy eating plate & healthy eating pyramid. (n.d.). Retrieved from www.hsph.harvard.edu/nutritionsource/pyramid-full-story/Google Scholar

Heath, C., & Soll, J. B. (1996). Mental budgeting and consumer decisions. Journal of Consumer Research, 23(1), 40–52.Google Scholar

Henley, D. E., Denneny, J. C., Hassink, S. G., Foti, M., Salvatore, F. R., Hansen, C. W., … & Henry-Crowe, S. T. (2015). Open letter, April 28. Retrieved from https://timedotcom.files.wordpress.com/2015/05/2015_04_28_obama.pdfGoogle Scholar

Herrnstein, R. J., Loewenstein, G. F., Prelec, D., & Vaughan, W. Jr. (1993). Utility maximization and melioration: Internalities in individual choice. Journal of Behavioral Decision Making, 6(3), 149–185.Google Scholar

Hertwig, R., & Gigerenzer, G. (1999). The “conjunction fallacy” revisited: How intelligent inferences look like reasoning errors. Journal of Behavioral Decision Making, 12(4), 275–305.Google Scholar

Hertwig, R., & Ortmann, A. (2001). Experimental practices in economics: A methodological challenge for psychologists?. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 24(3), 383–403.Google Scholar

Heukelom, F. 2014. Behavioral economics: A history. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Higgins, E. T., & Liberman, N. (2018). The loss of loss aversion: Paying attention to reference points. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 28(3), 524–532.Google Scholar

Hilton, D. (1995). The social context of reasoning: Conversational inference and rational judgment. Psychological Bulletin, 118(2), 248–271.Google Scholar

Hirshleifer, D. (2008). Psychological bias as a driver of financial regulation. European Financial Management, 14(5), 856–874.Google Scholar

Hoffrage, U., & Gigerenzer, G. (1998). Using natural frequencies to improve diagnostic inferences. Academic Medicine, 73(5), 538–540.Google Scholar

Hope, B. (2007). Latest hot co-op topic: Secondhand smoke. New York Sun, December 6, 1–3. Retrieved from www.nysun.com/real-estate/latest-hot-co-op-topic-secondhand-smoke/67569/Google Scholar

Hopkins, D., Briss, P., Harris, J., Ricard, C., Rosenquist, J., Harris, K., Husten, C., McKenna, J. W., Sharp, D. J., Woollery, T. A., Sharma, N., & Pechacek, T. (2000). Strategies for Reducing Exposure to Environmental Tobacco Smoke, Increasing Tobacco-Use Cessation, and Reducing Initiation in Communities and Health-Care Systems: A Report on Recommendations of the Task Force on Community Preventive Services. Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report: Recommendations and Reports, 49(RR-12), I–11.Google Scholar

Horstmann, G., & Ansorge, U. (2016). Surprise capture and inattentional blindness. Cognition, 157, 237–249.Google Scholar

Horstmann, G., & Herwig, A. (2015). Surprise attracts the eyes and binds the gaze. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 22(3), 743–749.Google Scholar

Horstmann, G., & Herwig, A. (2016). Novelty biases attention and gaze in a surprise trial. Attention, Perception, & Psychophysics, 78(1), 69–77.Google Scholar

Houde, S. (2014). How consumers respond to environmental certification and the value of energy information. NBER No. w20019. National Bureau of Economic Research.Google Scholar

Houthakker, H. S. (1950). Revealed preference and the utility function. Economica, 17(66), 159–174.Google Scholar

Hovenkamp, H. (1991). Legal policy and the endowment effect. Journal of Legal Studies, 20(2), 225–247.Google Scholar

Howard, G., Roe, B. E., Nisbet, E. C., & Martin, J. (2015). Hypothetical bias mitigation in choice experiments: Effectiveness of cheap talk and honesty priming fade with repeated choices. Available at SSRN: http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2697573Google Scholar

Huber, J., Payne, J. W., & Puto, C. (1982). Adding asymmetrically dominated alternatives: Violations of regularity and the similarity hypothesis. Journal of Consumer Research, 9(1), 90–98.Google Scholar

Ikeda, S. (1997). Dynamics of the mixed economy: Toward a theory of interventionism. London, UK: Routledge.Google Scholar

Ingraham, C. (2014). Think you drink a lot? This chart will tell you. The Washington Post, September 25. Retrieved from www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2014/09/25/think-you-drink-a-lot-this-chart-will-tell-you/?utm_term=.7ef5a29da02dGoogle Scholar

Ioannidis, J. P. (2008). Why most discovered true associations are inflated. Epidemiology, 19(5), 640–648.Google Scholar

Ioannidis, J. P. et al. (2017). https://academic.oup.com/ej/article/127/605/F236/5069452Google Scholar

Iowa Right to Life. (n.d.). Post abortion syndrome. Retrieved from www.iowartl.org/get-the-facts/abortion/post-abortion-syndromeGoogle Scholar

Isaac, A. G. (1998). The structure of neoclassical consumer theory. EconWPA No. 9805003. EconWPA.Google Scholar

Jachimowicz, J., Duncan, S., Weber, E. U., & Johnson, E. J. (2018). When and why defaults influence decisions: A meta-analysis of default effects. Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=2727301 or http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2727301Google Scholar

Jackson, M. O., & Yariv, L. (2014). Present bias and collective dynamic choice in the lab. American Economic Review, 104(12), 4184–4204.Google Scholar

Janis, I. L. (1972). Victims of groupthink: A psychological study of foreign-policy decisions and fiascoes. Boston, MA: Houghton Mifflin.Google Scholar

Jehle, G. A., & Reny, P. J. (2011). Advanced microeconomic theory. Harlow: Financial Times.Google Scholar

Jensen, R. P., Luo, W., Pankow, J. F., Strongin, R. M., & Peyton, D. H. (2015). Hidden formaldehyde in e-cigarette aerosols. New England Journal of Medicine, 372(4), 392–394. Retrieved from www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMc1413069?query=featured_home&Google Scholar

Jha, P. (1999). Curbing the epidemic: Governments and the economics of tobacco control. Washington, DC: World Bank.Google Scholar

Johnston, B. C., Kanters, S., Bandayrel, K., Wu, P., Naji, F., Siemieniuk, R. A., … & Mills, E. J. (2014). Comparison of weight loss among named diet programs in overweight and obese adults: A meta-analysis. Journal of the American Medical Association, 312(9), 923–933. Retrieved from http://doi:10.1001/jama.2014.10397Google Scholar

Johnston, L. (1996). Resisting change: Information‐seeking and stereotype change. European Journal of Social Psychology, 26(5), 799–825.Google Scholar

Jolls, C. (1998). Behavioral economic analysis of redistributive legal rules. Vanderbilt Law Review, 51, 1653–1677.Google Scholar

Jolls, C. (2011). Behavioral economics and the law. Foundations and Trends in Microeconomics, 6(3), 173–263.Google Scholar

Jolls, C., & Sunstein, C. R. (2006). Debiasing through law. Journal of Legal Studies, 35, 199–241.Google Scholar

Joram, E., & Read, D. (1996). Two faces of representativeness: The effects of response format on beliefs about random sampling. Journal of Behavioral Decision Making, 9(4), 249–264.Google Scholar

Juslin, P., Wennerholm, P., & Olsson, H. (1999). Format dependence in subjective probability calibration. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 25(4), 1038–1052.Google Scholar

Juslin, P., Winman, A., & Olsson, H. (2000). Naive empiricism and dogmatism in confidence research: A critical examination of the hard–easy effect. Psychological Review, 107(2), 384–396.Google Scholar

Juslin, P., Nilsson, H., & Winman, A. (2009). Probability theory, not the very guide of life. Psychological Review, 116(4), 856–874.Google Scholar

Kagan, J. (2012). Psychology’s ghosts: The crisis in the profession and the way back. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.Google Scholar

Kahneman, D. (2003). Maps of bounded rationality: Psychology for behavioral economics. American Economic Review, 93(5), 1449–1475.Google Scholar

Kahneman, D. (2011). Thinking fast and slow. New York: Farrar, Straus & Giroux.Google Scholar

Kahneman, D. (2017). Re: Reconstruction of a train wreck: How priming research went off the rails [Blog comment]. https://replicationindex.wordpress.com/2017/02/02/reconstruction-of-a-train-wreck-how-priming-research-went-of-the-rails/comment-page-1/#commentsGoogle Scholar

Kahneman, D., & Frederick, S. (2005). A model of heuristic judgment. In Holyoak, K. J. & Morrison, R. G. (Eds.), The Cambridge handbook of thinking and reasoning, 267–293. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Kahneman, D., & Tversky, A. (1996). On the reality of cognitive illusions. Psychological Review, 103(3), 582–591.Google Scholar

Kahneman, D., Knetsch, J. L., & Thaler, R. H. (1991). Anomalies: The endowment effect, loss aversion, and status quo bias. Journal of Economic Perspectives, 5(1), 193–206.Google Scholar

Kahneman, D., Wakker, P. P., & Sarin, R. (1997). Back to Bentham? Explorations of experienced utility. Quarterly Journal of Economics, 112(2), 375–406.Google Scholar

Kahneman, D., Ritov, I., & Schkade, D. (1999). Economic preferences or attitude expressions? An analysis of dollar responses to public issues. Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, 19(1), 203–235.Google Scholar

Kamenica, E. (2012). Behavioral economics and psychology of incentives. Annual Review of Economics, 4(1), 427–452.Google Scholar

Kao, A. B., & Couzin, I. D. (2014). Decision accuracy in complex environments is often maximized by small group sizes. Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences, 281(1784), 20133305. Retrieved from http://dx.doi.org/10.1098/rspb.2013.3305Google Scholar

Katz, L. (2014). Rational choice versus lawful choice. Journal of Institutional and Theoretical Economics, 170(1), 105–121.Google Scholar

Keinan, A., & Kivetz, R. (2008). Remedying hyperopia: The effects of self-control regret on consumer behavior. Journal of Marketing Research, 45(6), 676–689.Google Scholar

Keren, G. (1991). Calibration and probability judgments: Conceptual and methodological issues. Acta Psychologica, 77, 217–273.Google Scholar

Keren, G. (2013). A tale of two systems: Scientific advance or a theoretical stone soup? Commentary on Evans & Stanovich. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 8(3), 257–262.Google Scholar

Keren, G., & Schul, Y. (2009). Two is not always better than one: A critical evaluation of two-system theories. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 4(6), 533–550.Google Scholar

Kerr, N. L., & Tindale, R. S. (2004). Group performance and decision making. Annual Review of Psychology, 55, 623–655.Google Scholar

Kessler, J., & Vesterlund, L. (2015). The external validity of laboratory experiments: The misleading emphasis on quantitative effects. In Frechette, G. R. & Schotter, A. (Eds.), Handbook of experimental economic methodology, 391–404. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar

Kim, B. K., & Zauberman, G. (2009). Perception of anticipatory time in temporal discounting. Journal of Neuroscience, Psychology, and Economics, 2(2), 91.Google Scholar

King, M. F., & Bruner, G. C. (2000). Social desirability bias: A neglected aspect of validity testing. Psychology and Marketing, 17(2), 79–103.Google Scholar

Kirzner, I. M. (1973). Competition and entrepreneurship. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar

Klass, G., & Zeiler, K. (2013). Against endowment theory: Experimental economics and legal scholarship. UCLA Law Review, 61, 2–64.Google Scholar

Klayman, J., Soll, J. B., Gonzalez-Vallejo, C., & Barlas, S. (1999). Overconfidence: It depends on how, what, and whom you ask. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 79(3), 216–247.Google Scholar

Klayman, J., Soll, J., Juslin, P., & Winman, A. (2006). Subjective confidence and the sampling of knowledge. In Fiedler, K. & Juslin, P. (Eds.), Information sampling and adaptive cognition, 153–182. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Klein, D. B. (2004). Statist quo bias. Econ Journal Watch, 1(2), 260–271.Google Scholar

Klick, J., & Mitchell, G. (2006). Government regulation of irrationality: Moral and cognitive hazards. Minnesota Law Review, 90, 1620–1663.Google Scholar

Knight, F. H. (1921). Risk, uncertainty and profit. Boston, MA: Houghton Mifflin.Google Scholar

Koehler, J. J. (1996). The base rate fallacy reconsidered: Descriptive, normative, and methodological challenges. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 19(1), 1–17.Google Scholar

Koop, G. J., & Johnson, J. G. (2012). The use of multiple reference points in risky decision making. Journal of Behavioral Decision Making, 25(1), 49–62.Google Scholar

Kopczuk, W., & Slemrod, J. (2005). Denial of death and economic behavior. Advances in Theoretical Economics, 5(1).Google Scholar

Koppl, R. (2018). Expert failure. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Korobkin, R. (1998). The status quo bias and contract default rules. Cornell Law Review, 83(3), 608–682.Google Scholar

Korzybski, A. (1958). Science and sanity. Lakeville, CT: International Non-Aristotelian Library.Google Scholar

Kraemer, H. (2013). Statistical power: Issues and proper applications. In J. S. Comer, & Kendall, P. C. (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of research strategies for clinical psychology, 213–226. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar

Kreps, D. M. (2013). Microeconomic foundations I: Choice and competitive markets, Vol. 1. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar

Kroese, F. M., Evers, C., & De Ridder, D. T. (2011). Tricky treats: Paradoxical effects of temptation strength on self‐regulation processes. European Journal of Social Psychology, 41(3), 281–288.Google Scholar

Krueger, J. I., & Funder, D. C. (2004). Towards a balanced social psychology: Causes, consequences and cures for the problem-seeking approach to social behavior and cognition. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 27(3), 313–327.Google Scholar

Kruglanski, A. W., & Gigerenzer, G. (2011). Intuitive and deliberative judgments are based on common principles. Psychological Review, 118(1), 97–109.Google Scholar

Kuczmarski, R. J. (2007). What is obesity? Definitions matter. In Kumanyika, S. & Brownson, R. C. (Eds.), Handbook of obesity prevention: A resource for health professionals, 25–44. Boston, MA: Springer.Google Scholar

Kuczmarski, R. J., & Flegal, K. M. (2000). Criteria for definition of overweight in transition: Background and recommendations for the United States. American Journal of Clinical Nutrition, 72(5), 1074–1081.Google Scholar

Kudryavtsev, A., Cohen, G., & Hon-Snir, S. (2013). “Rational” or “intuitive”: Are behavioral biases correlated across stock market investors? Contemporary Economics, 7(2), 31–53.Google Scholar

Kunda, Z. (1987). Motivated inference: Self-serving generation and evaluation of causal theories. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 53(4), 636–647.Google Scholar

Kuran, T., & Sunstein, C. R. (1998). Availability cascades and risk regulation. Stanford Law Review, 51, 683–768.Google Scholar

Kurzban, R., Duckworth, A., Kable, J. W., & Myers, J. (2013). An opportunity cost model of subjective effort and task performance. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 36(6), 661–679.Google Scholar

Kwong, J. Y., Wong, K. F. E., & Tang, S. K. (2013). Comparing predicted and actual affective responses to process versus outcome: An emotion-as-feedback perspective. Cognition, 129(1), 42–50.Google Scholar

Laibson, D. I., Repetto, A., Tobacman, J., Hall, R. E., Gale, W. G., & Akerlof, G. A. (1998). Self-control and saving for retirement. Brookings Papers on Economic Activity, 1998(1), 91–196.Google Scholar

Le Grand, J., & New, B. (2015). Government paternalism: Nanny state or helpful friend? Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar

Lee, J. (2007). Repetition and financial incentives in economics experiments. Journal of Economic Surveys, 21(3), 628–681.Google Scholar

Leland, J. W. (2002). Similarity judgments and anomalies in intertemporal choice. Economic Inquiry, 40(4), 574–581.Google Scholar

Lerner, J. S., Li, Y., Valdesolo, P., & Kassam, K. S. (2015). Emotion and decision making. Annual Review of Psychology, 66, 799–823.Google Scholar

Leslie, I. (2016). The sugar conspiracy. The Guardian, April 7. Retrieved from www.theguardian.com/society/2016/apr/07/the-sugar-conspiracy-robert-lustig-john-yudkinGoogle Scholar

Leu, R. E., & Schaub, T. (1983). Does smoking increase medical care expenditure? Social Science & Medicine, 17(23), 1907–1914. Retrieved from www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/0277953683901685Google Scholar

Levi, I. (1983). Who commits the base rate fallacy? Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 6(3), 502–506.Google Scholar

Levi, I. (1996). Fallacy and controversy about base rates. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 19(1), 31–32.Google Scholar

Levi, I. (2002). Money pumps and diachronic books. Philosophy of Science, 69(S3), S235–S247.Google Scholar

Levine, L. J., Lench, H. C., Kaplan, R. L., & Safer, M. A. (2012). Accuracy and artifact: Reexamining the intensity bias in affective forecasting. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 103(4), 584–605.Google Scholar

Levine, L. J., Lench, H. C., Kaplan, R. L., & Safer, M. A. (2013). Like Schrödinger’s cat, the impact bias is both dead and alive: Reply to Wilson and Gilbert (2013). Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 105(5), 749–756.Google Scholar

Levitt, S. D., & List, J. A. (2007). Viewpoint: On the generalizability of lab behaviour to the field. Canadian Journal of Economics, 40, 347–370.Google Scholar

Lichtenstein, S., & Fischhoff, B. (1977). Do those who know more also know more about how much they know. Organizational Behavior and Human Performance, 20(2), 159–183.Google Scholar

Lichtenstein, S., Slovic, P., Fischhoff, B., Layman, M., & Combs, B. (1978). Judged frequency of events. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Learning and Memory, 4(6), 551–578.Google Scholar

Light, L. (2004). A fatally flawed food guide. Conscious Choice. Retrieved from http://web.archive.org/web/20090207074229/http://consciouschoice.com/2004/cc1711/wh_lead1711.htmlGoogle Scholar

Lipsey, R. G. (2001). Successes and failures in the transformation of economics. Journal of Economic Methodology, 8(2), 169–201.Google Scholar

Lipton, E. (2016). A lobbyist wrote the bill. Will the tobacco industry win its e-cigarette fight? The New York Times, September 2. Retrieved from www.nytimes.com/2016/09/03/us/politics/e-cigarettes-vaping-cigars-fda-altria.htmlGoogle Scholar

List of Cognitive Biases. (n.d.).Wikipedia. Retrieved from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_cognitive_biasesGoogle Scholar

List, J. A. (2003). Does market experience eliminate market anomalies? Quarterly Journal of Economics, 118(1), 41–71.Google Scholar

List, J. A. (2004). Neoclassical theory versus prospect theory: Evidence from the marketplace. Econometrica, 72(2), 615–625.Google Scholar

List, J. A. (2011). Does market experience eliminate market anomalies? The case of exogenous market experience. American Economic Review, 101(3), 313–317.Google Scholar

List, J. A., & Gallet, C. A. (2001). What experimental protocol influence disparities between actual and hypothetical stated values? Environmental and Resource Economics, 20(3), 241–254.Google Scholar

List, J. A., & Millimet, D. L. (2008). The market: Catalyst for rationality and filter of irrationality. The BE Journal of Economic Analysis & Policy, 8(1).Google Scholar