The Negative Consequences of Loss-Framed Performance Incentives

A-Tier
Journal: American Economic Journal: Economic Policy
Year: 2025
Volume: 17
Issue: 1
Pages: 506-39

Authors (3)

Lamar Pierce (not in RePEc) Alex Rees-Jones (University of Pennsylvania) Charlotte Blank (not in RePEc)

Score contribution per author:

1.341 = (α=2.01 / 3 authors) × 2.0x A-tier

α: calibrated so average coauthorship-adjusted count equals average raw count

Abstract

Behavioral economists have proposed that incentive contracts result in higher productivity when bonuses are "loss framed"—prepaid then clawed back if targets are unmet. We test this claim by randomizing the pre- or postpayment of sales bonuses at 294 car dealerships. Although somewhat statistically imprecise, our analysis provides strong indications that the random assignment of loss framing had quantitatively important negative effects. We document that the negative effects of loss framing can arise due to an increase in incentives for "gaming" behaviors. Based on these claims, we reassess the common wisdom regarding the desirability of loss framing.

Technical Details

RePEc Handle
repec:aea:aejpol:v:17:y:2025:i:1:p:506-39
Journal Field
General
Author Count
3
Added to Database
2026-01-29