Faculty & Research

Daniel Bartels

Assistant Professor of Marketing

Phone :
1-773-702-8325
Address :
5807 South Woodlawn Avenue
Chicago, IL 60637

Daniel Bartels investigates the mental processes underlying consumer financial decision making, moral psychology, and intertemporal choice. His work has appeared in such publications as Cognition, Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, Psychological Science, and Journal of Consumer Research.

Prior to joining Booth as a faculty member, Bartels taught behavioral economics at Columbia Business School. He also had a previous affiliation with Booth as a Postdoctoral Fellow for the Center for Decision Research from 2007-2010.

Bartels earned a Ph.D. in cognitive psychology from Northwestern University and a B.S. in psychology from the University of Wisconsin-Green Bay.

 

2013 - 2014 Course Schedule

Number Name Quarter
37101 Consumer Behavior 2014 (Winter)
37601 Marketing Workshop 2014 (Spring)

REVISION: Extralegal Punishment Factors: A Study of Forgiveness, Hardship, Good-Deeds, Apology, Remorse, and O
Date Posted: Aug  02, 2012
The criminal law's formal criteria for assessing punishment are typically contained in criminal codes, the rules of which fix an offender's liability and the grade of the offense. A look at how the punishment decision-making process actually works, however, suggests that courts and other decisionmakers frequently go beyond the formal legal factors and take account of what might be called "extralegal punishment factors" (XPFs). XPFs, the subject of this Article, include matters as diverse as a

New: A Group Construal Account of Drop-in-The-Bucket Thinking in Policy Preference and Moral Judgment
Date Posted: Oct  06, 2011
Decisions, both moral and mundane, about saving individuals or resources at risk are often influenced not only by numbers saved and lost, but also by proportions of groups saved and lost. Consider choosing between a program that saves 60 of 240 lives at risk and one that saves 50 of 100. The first option maximizes absolute number saved; the second, proportion saved. In two studies, we show that the influence of proportions on such decisions depends on how items at risk are mentally represented.

New: Representation Over Time: The Effects of Temporal Distance on Similarity
Date Posted: Oct  05, 2011
Similarity is central in human cognition, playing a role in a wide range of cognitive processes. In three studies, we demonstrate that subjective similarity may change as a function of temporal distance, with some events seeming more similar when considered in the near future, while others increase in similarity as temporal distance increases. Given the ubiquity of inter-temporal thought, and the fundamental role of similarity, these results have important implications for cognition in general.

New: Principled Moral Sentiment and the Flexibility of Moral Judgment and Decision Making
Date Posted: Oct  05, 2011
Three studies test eight hypotheses about (1) how judgment differs between people who ascribe greater vs. less moral relevance to choices, (2) how moral judgment is subject to task constraints that shift evaluative focus (to moral rules vs. to consequences), and (3) how differences in the propensity to rely on intuitive reactions affect judgment. In Study 1, judgments were affected by rated agreement with moral rules proscribing harm, whether the dilemma under consideration made moral rules vers

New: Perspectives on the Ecology of Decision Modes: Reply to Comments
Date Posted: Oct  05, 2011
We welcome and appreciate the insights and perspectives provided by Schwartz (2010, this issue), Tetlock and Mitchell (2010, this issue), and Bazerman and Greene (2010, this issue). Our thinking has benefited considerably from their responses, and we appreciate the opportunity to continue the discussion. In our reply, we address issues concerning the scope of moral rules and of cost-benefit analysis (CBA), including their relation to other decision modes. We then revisit the issue of closed-worl

New: The Costs and Benefits of Calculation and Moral Rules
Date Posted: Oct  05, 2011
There has been a recent upsurge of research on moral judgment and decision making. One important issue with this body of work concerns the relative advantages of calculating costs and benefits versus adherence to moral rules. The general tenor of recent research suggests that adherence to moral rules is associated with systematic biases and that systematic cost-benefit analysis is a normatively superior decision strategy. This article queries both the merits of cost-benefit analyses and the shor

New: Psychological Connectedness and Intertemporal Choice
Date Posted: Oct  05, 2011
People tend to attach less value to a good if they know a delay will occur before they obtain it. For example, people value receiving $100 tomorrow more than receiving $100 in 10 years. We explored one reason for this tendency (due to Parfit, 1984): In terms of psychological properties, such as beliefs, values, and goals, the decision maker is more closely linked to the person (his or her future self) receiving $100 tomorrow than to the person receiving $100 in 10 years. For this reason, he or s

New: Predicting Premeditation: Future Behavior is Seen as More Intentional than Past Behavior
Date Posted: Oct  05, 2011
People’s intuitions about the underlying causes of past and future actions might not be the same. In 3 studies, we demonstrate that people judge the same behavior as more intentional when it will be performed in the future than when it has been performed in the past. We found this temporal asymmetry in perceptions of both the strength of an individual’s intention and the overall prevalence of intentional behavior in a population. Because of its heightened intentionality, people thought the same

New: On Intertemporal Selfishness: How the Perceived Instability of Identity Underlies Impatient Consumpt
Date Posted: Oct  04, 2011
How does the anticipated connectedness between one’s current and future identity help explain impatience in intertemporal preferences? The less consumers are closely connected psychologically to their future selves, the less willing they will be to forgo immediate benefits in order to ensure larger deferred benefits to be received by that future self. When consumers’ measured or manipulated sense of continuity with their future selves is lower, they accept smaller-sooner rewards, wait less in or

New: Caring About Framing Effects
Date Posted: Oct  04, 2011
We explored the relationship between qualities of victims in hypothetical scenarios and the appearance of framing effects. In past studies, participants’ feelings about the victims have been demonstrated to affect whether framing effects appear, but this relationship has not been directly examined. In the present study, we examined the relationship between caring about the people at risk, the perceived interdependence of the people at risk, and frame. Scenarios were presented that differed in th

New: Proportion Dominance: The Generality and Variability of Favoring Relative Savings Over Absolute Savi
Date Posted: Oct  04, 2011
Four studies probe Ps' sensitivity to absolute and relative savings. In three studies, Ps read scenarios forcing a tradeoff of saving more lives (230 vs. 225) vs. saving a larger proportion of a population (225 ‚ 230 = 75% vs. 230 ‚ 920 = 25%). Ps' preferences were driven by both absolute and relative savings. Maximizing relative savings, called ‘‘proportion dominance’’ (PD), at the expense of absolute savings is non-normative, and most participants concur with this argument upon reflection (Stu

New: Are Morally Motivated Decision Makers Insensitive to the Consequences of Their Choices?
Date Posted: Oct  04, 2011
Is morally motivated decision making different from other kinds of decision making? There is evidence that when people have sacred or protected values (PVs), they reject trade-offs for secular values (e.g., ‘‘You can’t put a price on a human life’’) and tend to employ deontological rather than consequentialist decision principles. People motivated by PVs appear to show quantity insensitivity. That is, in trade-off situations, they are less sensitive to the consequences of their choices than are

New: The Mismeasure of Morals: Antisocial Personality Traits Predict Utilitarian Responses to Moral Dilem
Date Posted: Oct  04, 2011
Researchers have recently argued that utilitarianism is the appropriate framework by which to evaluate moral judgment, and that individuals who endorse non-utilitarian solutions to moral dilemmas (involving active vs. passive harm) are committing an error. We report a study in which participants responded to a battery of personality assessments and a set of dilemmas that pit utilitarian and non-utilitarian options against each other. Participants who indicated greater endorsement of utilitarian

New: Predicting Premeditation: Future Behavior is Seen as More Intentional than Past Behavior
Date Posted: Jul  19, 2011
People‟s intuitions about the underlying causes of past and future actions might not be the same. In three studies, we demonstrate that people judge the same behavior as more intentional when it will be performed in the future than when it has been performed in the past. We found this temporal asymmetry in perceptions of both the strength of an individual‟s intention and the overall prevalence of intentional behavior in a population. Because of its heightened intentionality, people thought the s

REVISION: Competing Theories of Blackmail: An Empirical Research Critique of Criminal Law Theory
Date Posted: Apr  12, 2011
Blackmail, a wonderfully curious offense, is the favorite of clever criminal law theorists. It criminalizes the threat to do something that would not be criminal if one did it. There exists a rich literature on the issue, with many prominent legal scholars offering their accounts. Each theorist has his own explanation as to why the blackmail offense exists. Most theories seek to justify the position that blackmail is a moral wrong and claim to offer an account that reflects widely shared moral i

New: The Costs and Benefits of Calculation and Moral Rules
Date Posted: Sep  08, 2009
There has been a recent upsurge of research on moral judgment and decision making. One important issue with this body of work concerns the relative advantages of calculating costs and benefits versus adhering to moral rules. The general tenor of recent research suggests that (i) adherence to moral rules is associated with systematic biases, and (ii) systematic cost-benefit analysis is a normatively superior decision strategy. The current paper queries both the merits of cost-benefit analyses and