Timm Opitz, M.Sc.

Articles in Refereed Journals

Klimm, Felix; Kocher, Martin G.; Opitz, Timm; Schudy, Simeon Andreas (2023). Time Pressure and Regret in Sequential Search, Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, 206, 406-424. DOI

• Perceived urgency and regret are common in many sequential search processes; for example, sellers often pressure buyers in search of the best offer, both time-wise and in terms of potential regret of forgoing unique purchasing opportunities. Theoretically, these strategies result in anticipated and experienced regret, which systematically affect search behavior and thereby distort optimal search. In addition, urgency may alter decision-making processes and thereby the salience of regret. To understand the empirical relevance of these aspects, we study the causal effects of regret, urgency, and their interaction on search behavior in a pre-registered, theory-based, and well-powered experiment. Empirically, we find that anticipated regret does not affect search behavior either with or without time pressure, while experienced regret leads to systematic adjustments in search length. Urgency reduces decision times and perceived decision quality, but does not generally alter search length. Only very inexperienced decision-makers buy earlier when pressured. Thus, consumer protection measures against pressure selling tactics can help inexperienced consumers in particular.
• Also published as CESifo Working Paper No. 9122
• Also published as: CRC TRR 190 Discussion Paper, No. 359

Opitz, Timm; Schuwerk, Tobias; Paulus, Markus; Kloo, Daniela; Osterhaus, Christopher; Lesch, Klaus‐Peter; Sodian, Beate (2021). No Links Between Genetic Variation and Developing Theory of Mind: A Preregistered Replication Attempt of Candidate Gene Studies, Developmental Science 2021. DOI

• Genetic variability is being discussed as a source of inter‐individual differences in Theory of Mind development. Previous studies documented an association between variations in DRD4 VNTR 48 bp, OXTR rs53576, COMT rs4680, and Theory of Mind task performance. As empirical evidence on these associations is sparse, we conducted a preregistered replication attempt of a study reporting a link between DRD4 VNTR 48 bp and false belief understanding in 50‐month‐old children [Lackner, C., Sabbagh, M. A., Hallinan, E., Liu, X., & Holden, J. J. (2012). Developmental Science, 15(2), 272–280.]. Additionally, we attempted a replication of studies on the role of OXTR rs53576 and COMT rs4680 in Theory of Mind. In both replication attempts, we did not find any evidence for associations between the sampled genetic markers and Theory of Mind ability in a series of analyses. Extending the replication attempt of Lackner et al., we employed longitudinal data from several tasks and measurement points, which allowed us to run follow‐up robustness checks with more reliable scores. These extensive analyses corroborated our null finding. This comprehensive non‐replication is important to balance current research on genetic markers of Theory of Mind. In a combined evaluation of our own and previous studies, we point to substantial methodological issues that research on the genetic basis of Theory of Mind development faces. We conclude that these limitations currently prevent firm conclusions on genetic influences on Theory of Mind development.

Discussion Papers

Opitz, Timm (2024). Interpersonal Preferences and Team Performance: The Role of Liking in Complex Problem Solving, CRC TRR 190 Discussion Paper, No. 492.

• Organizations increasingly rely on teams to solve complex problems. The ability of teams to work well together is critical to their success. I experimentally test whether team performance is affected by whether team members like each other. I find that teams in which partners like each other do not outperform teams in which partners dislike each other. However, teams in which one partner likes the other more than the other perform best. The performance differences result directly from changes in collaborative behavior when learning the team partner’s interpersonal preferences, not indirectly from interacting with different individuals. Participants do not anticipate this pattern and
  expect to be most successful in a team where partners like each other. This provides insights into how teams should be optimally composed, when self-selection may be detrimental to performance, and what information about others’ interpersonal preferences should be revealed.
• https://rationality-and-competition.de/wp-content/uploads/discussion_paper/492.pdf

Bartoš, Vojtĕch; Castro, Silvia; Czura, Kristina; Opitz, Timm (2023). Gendered Access to Finance: The Role of Team Formation, Idea Quality, and Implementation Constraints in Business Evaluations, CESifo Working Paper, 10719.

• We analyze gender discrimination in entrepreneurship finance. Access to finance is crucial for entrepreneurial success, yet constraints for women are particularly pronounced. We structurally unpack whether loan officers evaluate business ideas and implementation constraints differently for male and female entrepreneurs, both as individual entrepreneurs or in entrepreneurial teams. In a lab-in-the-field experiment with Ugandan loan officers, we document gender discrimination of individual female entrepreneurs, but no gender bias in the evaluation of entrepreneurial teams. Our results suggest that the observed bias is not driven by animus against female entrepreneurs but rather by differential beliefs about women’s entrepreneurial ability or implementation constraints in running a business. Policies aimed at team creation for start-up enterprises may have an additional benefit of equalizing access to finance and ultimately stimulating growth.
• https://www.cesifo.org/en/publications/2023/working-paper/gendered-access-finance-role-team-formation-idea-quality-and

Opitz, Timm; Schwaiger, Christoph (2023). Reciprocal Preferences in Matching Markets, Max Planck Institute for Innovation & Competition Research Paper, No. 23-06.

• Agents with reciprocal preferences prefer to be matched to a partner who also likes to collaborate with them. In this paper, we introduce and formalize reciprocal preferences, apply them to matching markets, and analyze the implications for mechanism design. Formally, the preferences of an agent can depend on the preferences of potential partners and there is incomplete information about the
  partners’ preferences. We find that there is no stable mechanism in standard two-sided markets. Observing the final allocation of the mechanism enables agents to learn about each other’s preferences, leading to instability. However, in a school choice setting with one side of the market being non-strategic, modified versions of the deferred acceptance mechanism can achieve stability. These results provide insights into non-standard preferences in matching markets, and their implications for efficient information and mechanism design.
• Available at SSRN

Opitz, Timm; Schwaiger, Christoph (2022). Everyone Likes to Be Liked: Experimental Evidence from Matching Markets, CRC TRR 190 Discussion Paper, No. 366.

• Matching markets can be unstable when individuals prefer to be matched to a partner who also wants to be matched with them. Through a pre-registered and theory-guided laboratory experiment, we provide evidence that such reciprocal preferences exist, significantly decrease stability in matching markets, and are driven both by belief-based and preference-based motives. Participants expect partners who want to be matched with them to be more cooperative, and are more altruistic themselves. This leads to higher cooperation and larger profits when participants can consider each other’s preferences.
• https://rationality-and-competition.de/wp-content/uploads/2023/01/366_.pdf

Klimm, Felix; Kocher, Martin G.; Opitz, Timm; Schudy, Simeon Andreas (2022). Time Pressure and Regret in Sequential Search (CRC TRR 190 Discussion Paper, No. 359 ).

• Perceived urgency and regret are common in many sequential search processes; for example, sellers often pressure buyers in search of the best offer, both time-wise and in terms of potential regret of forgoing unique purchasing opportunities. Theoretically, these strategies result in anticipated and experienced regret, which systematically affect search behavior and thereby distort optimal search. In addition, urgency may alter decision-making processes and thereby the salience of regret. To understand the empirical relevance of these aspects, we study the causal effects of regret, urgency, and their interaction on search behavior in a pre-registered,
  theory-based, and well-powered experiment. Empirically, we find that anticipated regret
  does not affect search behavior either with or without time pressure, while experienced
  regret leads to systematic adjustments in search length. Urgency reduces decision times and perceived decision quality, but does not generally alter search length. Only very inexperienced decision-makers buy earlier when pressured. Thus, consumer protection measures against pressure selling tactics can help inexperienced consumers in particular.
• https://rationality-and-competition.de/wp-content/uploads/2022/12/359.pdf
• Also published in: Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Volume 206, February 2023, Pages 406-424
• Also published as: CESifo Working Paper No. 9122

Klimm, Felix; Kocher, Martin G.; Opitz, Timm; Schudy, Simeon Andreas (2021). Time Pressure and Regret in Sequential Search (CESifo Working Paper, No. 9122 ).

• Perceived urgency and regret are common in many sequential search processes; for example, sellers often pressure buyers in search of the best offer, both time-wise and in terms of potential regret of forgoing unique purchasing opportunities. Theoretically, these strategies result in anticipated and experienced regret, which systematically affect search behavior and thereby distort optimal search. In addition, urgency may alter decision-making processes and thereby the salience of regret. To understand the empirical relevance of these aspects, we study the causal effects of regret, urgency, and their interaction on search behavior in a pre-registered, theory-based, and well-powered experiment. We find that urgency reduces decision times and perceived decision quality but does not alter search length. Only very inexperienced decision-makers buy earlier when pressured. Anticipated regret does not affect search length (neither with nor without time pressure), while experienced regret leads to systematic adjustments in search length. Thus, we recommend that consumer protection policies should particularly focus on markets with inexperienced first-time buyers.
• https://www.cesifo.org/en/publikationen/2021/working-paper/time-pressure-and-regret-sequential-search
• Also published in: Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization Volume 206, February 2023, Pages 406-424
• Also published as: CRC TRR 190 Discussion Paper, No. 359