175. Why You Should Bribe Your Kids

Episode Summary

Executive Summary: The episode examines a field experiment by economist John List and Anya Samek showing that moral education alone rarely changes behavior, but small incentives can strongly shift children’s food choices and even adults’ purchases. The broader lesson is that people respond best when education is paired with immediate rewards, especially for decisions with long-term consequences like diet, school, taxes, retirement, and climate action.

Main Topics: Bribing vs. incentivizing kids (Priority: 4/5): John List opens by describing his attempt to get his own children to eat seafood using large cash rewards, illustrating how hard it is to change habits even with substantial money. Field experiment in Chicago Kids’ Cafes (Priority: 5/5): List and Anya Samek randomized 24 after-school sites to test whether education or incentives would change children’s snack choices between cookie and fruit. Education fails, incentives succeed (Priority: 5/5): A USDA-style food pyramid campaign and motivational messaging did not shift choices, while cheap prizes like pens, bracelets, and trophies dramatically increased healthy selections. Behavioral economics beyond food (Priority: 4/5): The discussion broadens to how incentives and messaging apply to school attendance, retirement saving, smoking, voting, climate behavior, and tax compliance. Combining messaging with incentives (Priority: 5/5): List argues that information matters over the long run, but immediate incentives are needed to change behavior now; the most effective approach is to combine both. Policy constraints and real-world application (Priority: 4/5): The conversation explores why policymakers often rely on cheap moral suasion rather than stronger sanctions, and how field experiments can guide practical policy design.

Key Arguments: Habits are difficult to change even when people are paid substantial sums, as List learned with his own children. In the Chicago experiment, baseline healthy choice was below 20%, and education alone did not improve it. Cheap incentives produced a large behavior change: about 8 out of 10 children chose fruit when prizes were offered. The results suggest that moral messaging is often ineffective when the audience does not already value or demand the information. Incentives can work in adult settings too, not just with children; a grocery-store study showed stronger effects than education alone. The best policy design combines education with immediate rewards so that people make better near-term decisions aligned with future welfare. Many societal problems are intertemporal trade-offs: people prefer short-term benefits over long-term gains in health, education, taxes, and the environment.

Data Points: Children in study sites: About 1,500 - Kids in Chicago after-school cafeterias participating in the dessert-choice experiment Participating sites: 24 - Kids’ Cafes in Chicago and surrounding area randomized into treatments Baseline healthy choice: Less than 20% - Share of children choosing fruit before interventions Post-education healthy choice: About 20% (8 out of 10 still chose cookie) - Food pyramid / Eat Strong messaging did not change selection Post-incentive healthy choice: About 80% - When children were offered prizes for choosing and eating fruit Incentive cost: Less than a dime each - Pens, rubber bracelets, and tiny plastic trophies used as rewards Number of treatment days: Five - Incentive phase repeated across multiple visits with sustained effects Adult grocery study reward: $1 per 5 servings - Adults at Louis Groceries received money for buying at least five servings of fruits and vegetables in a shopping trip U.S. childhood obesity rate: About 1 in 5 - General context for why improving food choices matters Future labor-market return to schooling: 12% per year - List cites return to staying in school as an example of long-term payoff

Pivotal Quotes: "You can make a small change in a school setting, in a food setting for kids, and have it have a big impact on choices." — John List: Summarizing the experiment’s practical takeaway "Education is not enough." — John List: After describing the failure of the food-pyramid messaging arm "I think the message would be you want to do both." — John List: Explaining that education should be paired with incentives rather than used alone

Implications: Behavior change is more likely when immediate rewards are added to education. For public policy, this supports nudges, subsidies, and small incentives over messaging alone in health, schooling, taxes, and sustainability.