This paper investigates the role of precommitment (making a choice in the present to ensure a future course of action) in making healthy food choices, using a lab-in-the-field experiment embedded in the Young Lives longitudinal study in Peru. 

Leveraging the fact that participants were scheduled for a blood test and would therefore require a snack afterwards, the team requested participants’ snack choice from predefined options. Participants were asked whether they wished to pre-commit to their preferred snack choice (either healthy or unhealthy) to be consumed the following day, following their blood test or to choose the snack on the spot. A randomised subsample was informed about the rationale for precommitment (information treatment) prior to their decision. After deciding whether they would like to pre-commit their snack choice or not, participants were again randomised into two groups: the first group had their preferred choice (either pre-commit or choose on the spot) implemented; in contrast, the second group’s choice was overridden (‘choice override’ treatment). 

Our findings suggest that: 

• There is a high demand for precommitment, with 68.5% of participants wanting to pre-commit their preferred snack choice.
• The information treatment had no significant effect on participants’ willingness to pre-commit.
• Overriding participants’ precommitment decision leads to asymmetric effects on desired behaviour:
  • for those who had pre-committed to a healthy snack, being forced to choose on the spot decreases healthy food choice;
  • conversely, those who pre-committed to an unhealthy snack were more likely to choose a healthy one. 

These findings highlight the need to carefully target commitment devices, given their potential asymmetric effects on desired behaviours.

Download the open access version of the article via the link below; the article will also be published in June's edition (Vol 114) of the Journal of Economic Psychology.