CESR Events

Series resumes Monday, January 26, 2026

Monday, April 6
12pm – 1pm PT
VPD 203 and Zoom

Abstract: Why do spouses hide income from each other, and why would they pay to reveal it? This paper studies preferences over income privacy within households using a laboratory experiment with low-income urban couples in Kenya that identifies willingness to pay for income hiding (or transparency). We show that a substantial share of spouses are willing to sacrifice income to keep earnings hidden (36% of wives and 26% of husbands). At the same time, we document a previously under-explored phenomenon: a large fraction of spouses are willing to pay to reveal income to their partner (20% of wives and 31% of husbands). Using vignette-based survey experiments, we provide evidence on perceived motives and consequences of hiding and revealing income, including future-oriented investment, hedging against marital dissolution, and sanctions after financial disclosure. Together, these results challenge standard household models and provide a foundation to inform future models of the household. 

Bio: Jessica is an Associate Professor at Colorado College and applied microeconomist who specializes in experimental methods. Previously, she was an Associate Research Fellow at the International Food Policy Research Institute, an Evaluation Coordinator for Innovations for Poverty Action- Kenya, and a Research Assistant at the Federal Reserve Board. She holds a PhD and MA in Economics from the University of Michigan and a BA in Math and Economics from Reed College.

Monday, April 13
12pm – 1pm PT
VPD 203 and Zoom

Abstract: Deliberative democracy advocates argue that deliberation can strengthen democracy in part by reducing partisan hostility and affective polarization. Yet whether and why this holds remains under-examined. This paper demonstrates that deliberation can reduce partisan animus by promoting engagement with out-partisan policy perspectives. This engagement builds cognitive empathy, increasing positive affect and tolerance toward out-partisans. Evidence is from an experiment in Honduras. Deliberators were randomly assigned to defend policies with which they agreed (own perspective) or disagreed (out-partisan perspective). Deliberation reduced affective polarization and out partisan animus. These reductions were concentrated and more persistent in the out-partisan perspective group, while polarization increased modestly in the own-perspective group. The findings demonstrate that engagement with out-partisan policy viewpoints is an important causal mechanism driving deliberation’s impact while also highlighting the potential limits of deliberation and discussion in the absence of active engagement with out-group points of view.

Bio: I am an Associate Professor of Political Science and International Relations at the University of Southern California (USC). My research is motivated by the challenges facing contemporary democracies. I aim to shed light on these challenges and to contribute ideas — rigorously tested with methods attuned to causal inference — about how to foster democratic renewal. This work spans three main areas: clientelism and distributive politics; democratic accountability and renewal; and democracy and the judiciary. I have conducted field research in Benin, Ghana, Kenya, and Malawi, and have recently expanded my comparative focus to include cases in the Americas, including Honduras and the United States. I am the author of Money for Votes: The Causes and Consequences of Electoral Clientelism in Africa (Cambridge University Press, 2018), which received the African Politics Conference Group award for best book. My research has appeared in leading journals such as the American Political Science Review, the American Journal of Political Science, the British Journal of Political Science, Perspectives on Politics, and World Politics, and has been supported by grants from the National Science Foundation and the International Growth Centre. I received my PhD from UCLA and was a postdoctoral fellow at the Center on Democracy, Development, and the Rule of Law at Stanford University. Prior to joining USC, I was on the faculty at George Washington University.

Monday, April 20
12pm – 1pm PT
Zoom

Abstract: Over the twentieth century, life expectancy increased substantially, creating the expectation that each successive generation would live both longer and healthier lives. Emerging evidence, however, suggests that this assumption may no longer hold. Research increasingly points to a phenomenon described as the Generational Health Drift, whereby more recent cohorts experience similar, or in some cases worse, health than earlier generations at the same age, despite continuing improvements in longevity.

George will present evidence on this trend using data from international longitudinal population surveys alongside the UK’s national British birth cohort studies. By comparing health trajectories across multiple generations, he will show how changing social, economic and policy environments shape population health over time.

Building on this evidence, George will examine the broader societal implications of the Generational Health Drift, including its potential consequences for labour market participation and future pressures on health and care systems. He will also discuss the need for policies that mitigate its impacts, supporting healthy ageing, sustaining workforce participation and ensuring the sustainability of health systems in the decades ahead.

Bio: George Ploubidis is Professor of Population Health and Statistics at the UCL Social Research Institute, University College London and Director of the National Child Development Study and the 1970 British Cohort Study at the UCL Centre for Longitudinal Studies. His research focuses on the social and demographic determinants of health across the life course and on understanding generational differences in population health and mortality using longitudinal population data. Before joining UCL, he held academic posts at the London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine and the University of Cambridge.

Monday, April 27
12pm – 1pm PT
VPD 203 and Zoom

Monday, May 4
12pm – 1pm PT
VPD 203 and Zoom

Tuesday, May 12
12pm – 1pm PT
VPD 203 and Zoom

Wednesday, May 27
11am – 12pm PT
VPD 203 and Zoom

Monday, June 8
11am – 12pm PT
VPD 203 and Zoom

Thursday, April 30
9am – 10am Pacific Time
Zoom (See email for Zoom link)

Abtract: Dementia is a prevalent and costly disease, but its effects on individuals and families’ economic outcomes are poorly understood. Existing papers have used the timing of disease diagnosis in an event study framework to estimate the effect of disease onset on work, income and wealth. One limitation of such approach is that dementia is difficult to diagnose and whether and when an individual gets diagnosed is endogenous. In this paper, we take a different route and focus on the genetic risk for dementia. Dementia has a strong genetic basis and we investigate how this genetic risk is related to early, mid, and late-life economic outcomes for individuals and their family members. To do that, we construct a novel data set that merges genetic and survey-based data from the Dutch Lifelines Biobank with dementia diagnosis records, longitudinal tax and health expenditure data from national-level administrative sources. We show that our constructed measure of genetic risk for dementia is predictive of dementia diagnosis from administrative data, but only after age 70, when dementia prevalence begins to increase sharply. Further, genetic risk for dementia is unrelated to socio-economic background in early and mid-life, contrary to what we find if we use dementia diagnosis. Preliminary results indicate that genetic risk for dementia has limited effects on the earnings, income and wealth of affected individuals, but that it has a substantial negative effect on the wealth of offspring. As parents age, offspring of parents in the top tercile of genetic risk see a reduction in wealth of 15% when compared to those with parents in the lower tercile of genetic risk.

Bio: Silvia Helena Barcellos is an Associate Professor of Population Health Sciences and Public Affairs. She is a health economist, and her work aims to understand the interplay between socio-economic status and health across the lifespan, with a focus on the role public policy plays on such relationships. She is currently the PI of an NIA R01 grant on gene-environment interactions in education, cognitive functioning, and dementiarisk. Professor Barcellos is also a Faculty Research Fellow at the National Bureau of Economic Research (NBER, Cambridge MA) and an International Research Associate at the Institute for Fiscal Studies (IFS, London UK).

Thursday, June 4
9am – 10am Pacific Time
Zoom (See email for Zoom link)