????行為金融學研究的是為什么人們會在錢的問題上做出不理智的決定。這門學科已經在投資領域產生了很大的影響。大家可以看一看現在許多公司是怎么把員工納入401（k）養老金項目的，同時看一看它們是怎樣逐步擴大遞延項目的。如今這兩項工作在很多情況下都實現了自動化：無論是不想繳納養老金，還是想提高繳納金額，人們都可以自行選擇。同樣的，很多養老金項目都已經用預定了日期的退休基金取代貨幣市場基金作為它們的默認投資標的。

????雖然有些人認為這樣做過于大包大攬，但這種方法（相當于把人們不喜歡吃的西蘭花藏在意大利面和奶酪中間）對人們有利。它們會帶來理想的統計數據，比如自動繳納養老金能極大地提升參與率；同時，只憑這一點就能幫助人們為自己退休后的生活存更多的錢。

????那么，在保險領域情況如何呢？幾個星期之前，我在一篇文章中談到了自己走訪威斯康星大學麥迪遜分校商學院（the Wisconsin Business School at the University of Wisconsin in Madison）的情況。在那兒，我和精算學、風險管理與保險系助理教授賈斯汀?西德諾見了面，他的很大一部分研究都集中在行為金融學領域。我們談到了面對令人眼花繚亂的各種保險投保人會出現毫無理性可言的錯誤，以及人們怎樣才能讓自己避免這樣的情況。

????在此我總結了三大要點：

????我們關注的參數不對

????請大家想想別人最近一次向你們兜售健康保險時的情況。無論是在健康保險交易市場中選購，還是在雇主提供的目錄中挑選，我們都要考慮很多因素：共同承擔費用（co-payments）、能否及時得到診治以及自付金額（deductibles）的多少。西德諾說：“非常容易出現這樣一種情況，那就是人們關注的因素從經濟角度來說實際上不是很重要，同時遺漏了那些對自身經濟而言很重要的因素。”具體來說就是，人們往往過度關注自付金額，原因是這個數字很大。而這可能是個錯誤。

????大家可以嘗試一下這樣的做法：如果你們篩選健康保險的第一個條件是自付金額，而且會去找那些自付金額低的保險，最終你挑出來的都會是價格較高的保險，那些價格較低的都會從你的手邊溜走。西德諾的建議與之相反，他認為大家應該首先通過那些影響不是很大的因素來縮小挑選范圍，比如共保率以及你真正想要的醫療保健服務供應商，最后再去比較自付金額。這樣，大家挑選出來的保險就會更適合自己的需要（以及自己的收入水平）。

????我們沒算清楚

????無論是車險還是健康險，保費通常都不會按年計算，而是按季度或者按月計算。而另一方面，自付金額卻按年計算。西德諾的研究表明，許多人太關注自付金額，以至于他們本不該支出的保費超過了他們省下來的自付費用。西德諾解釋說：“如果你的年保費多繳了450美元，并且借此讓自付金額減少了500美元，其中的差額也只有50美元，而且你得先繳450美元。”這樣的做法并不聰明。而更不聰明的做法是：“我們發現有些人多繳了600美元保費，卻只節省了500美元的自付費用。”

????大家可以嘗試一下這樣的做法：把注意力放在年度保費上。如果是按月繳納就乘以12，按季度繳納就乘以4（我知道這聽上去容易得可笑，但太多太多的人都沒有進行這樣的計算）。然后，看看保費和自付費用之間的差距。西德諾指出：“如果這兩個數字相近，那就買自付費用高的保險。否則，你的做法實際上就是先付一筆錢，再用它來降低以后出現的自付費用。”

????我們投錯保了

????你們給自己的手機上過保險嗎？為新買的電子產品延長過保修期嗎？或者出于“如果刮了蹭了，我可不想花1400美元來修車”的心理而選擇了自付金額低的車險呢？西德諾解釋說，人們的行為模式往往是花錢來防范較小的損失，同時卻忽略了較大的經濟風險。他指出：“我們購買的不是殘疾險。有些購房者不買額外責任險。如果我們算一算防范小風險的全部費用，然后把這筆錢用于出現幾率較低的大風險，我們在整個人生中的風險管理就能得到極大的改善。”

????大家可以嘗試一下這樣的做法：給自己無力更換的東西上保險。如果自己有能力更換，就不用投保。西德諾說：“我的大原則是，除非有真正充分的理由相信自己與眾不同，而且——舉例來說——會弄壞五部iPhone，否則基本上就不用為1000美元以下的東西投保，把錢集中用在防范較大的風險上效果更好。”

????“為你自己無力更換的東西投保，比如住宅或者收入；不要為小東小西買額外的保險。這才是保險作為突發事件緩沖的作用。”（財富中文網）

????譯者：Charlie

????Behavioral finance -- the study of why humans make irrational decisions about money -- has made its mark on the world of investing in a big way. Look at the way many companies now both enroll employees into their 401(k) plans and ratchet up their deferrals. Both are now frequently done automatically; if you don't want to participate or increase the amount you kick in, it's up to you to opt out. Similarly, there are many plans where target-date retirement funds have replaced money market funds, as the investment default.

????Although some believe this is too "Big Brother," these tactics (the financial equivalent of hiding the broccoli in the mac and cheese) are a good thing. They point to success stats like the huge lift in participation rates when a plan automatically enrolls -- and how that alone can help employees stash away more for retirement.

????But what about in the world of insurance? A few weeks ago, I wrote about my trip to the Wisconsin Business School at the University of Wisconsin in Madison. While there, I spent time with Justin Sydnor, an assistant professor in the Department of Actuarial Science, Risk Management, and Insurance who conducts much of his research in the field of behavioral finance. We talked about the none-too-rational mistakes humans make when shopping in this confounding field -- and how we can help ourselves through them.

????Here are three biggies:

????We focus on the wrong variables

????Think about the last time you were asked to choose a health insurance plan. Whether you were shopping an exchange or your employer's menu, chances are there were many features to consider: co-payments, doctor availability, and deductibles. "It's very easy to focus on the features that turn out to not to be financially important while missing the ones that are," Sydnor says. Specifically, we have a tendency to focus too much on deductibles because of the large numbers associated with them. That can be a mistake.

????Try this instead: If the first filter you apply when you're looking at policies is the deductible -- and you go for a low one -- you'll end up looking at a bunch of high-priced policies and miss the lower-priced ones altogether. Instead, Sydnor suggest narrowing the universe by first looking at factors that don't have a huge impact like the coinsurance rate and the health care providers you really want. By leaving the deductible comparison to the end, you'll get a policy that's better suited to your needs (and your wallet).

????We don't do the math

????Premiums, whether you're talking about auto insurance or health insurance, are typically not presented as a yearly number -- but as a quarterly or monthly number. Deductibles, on the other hand, are presented as an annual number. And as Sydnor's research has shown, many people are so laser tuned to that factor they end up paying more in overall premiums than they save on deductibles. "If you pay $450 more in annual premiums and that gets you a $500 lower deductible, it's a $50 difference -- and you've paid the $450 up front," he explains. That's not a smart move. Even less smart: "We've seen cases where people will pay a $600 difference for a $500 lower deductible."

????Try this instead. Look at the yearly premiums. If they're quoted in monthly increments multiply by 12. If they're quoted quarterly, multiply by four. (I know it sounds ridiculously easy, but far too many people don't go the extra step.) Then look at the spread between the difference in premiums and the deductible. "If the two numbers are close buy the high deductible policy," Sydnor says. "Otherwise, you're essentially paying up front for a reduction in deductible later."

????We insure the wrong things

????Have you ever bought insurance on your cell phone? Or taken out an extended warranty on a new electronic? Or opted for a low deductible on your car insurance because, you thought: "If I have a fender bender, I don't want to have to come up with $1,400 to fix my car." We do these things all the time -- Sydnor explains -- essentially spending money to protect ourselves against relatively small losses. At the same time we're ignoring much bigger financial risks. "We're not buying disability policies. Some homeowners aren't buying excess liability," he says. "If we took all the money we paid to cover ourselves for small risks and devoted it to unlikely but big ones, that would be a much better way to manage the risk in our overall lives."

????Try this instead: If you can't afford to replace it, insure it. If you can afford to replace it, don't. "My general principal is that unless you have a really good reason to believe you are highly special and are, for example, going to destroy five iPhones, you're better off avoiding most coverage under $1,000 and focusing on the bigger risks," Sydnor says.

????"Insure the things you can't replace by yourself like your house or your income and don't pay for extra insurance on the small things. That's what your emergency cushion is for."