We design and conduct a real-effort experiment to jointly estimate present bias and sophistication across effort and monetary domains. Unlike prior work (e.g.,Augenblick and Rabin, 2019; Fedyk, 2024), we do not assume that these parameters are identical across domains. We explain and empirically demonstrate how assuming identical sophistication across money and effort domains can bias the estimates of key parameters. In our online experiment, participants chose to (predicted to) complete 14% (10%) fewer tasks on the same day than on a future day, leading to an estimated present bias ($\beta_e$) over effort of 0.70–0.79, and an estimated sophistication ($\widehat{\beta}_e$) of 0.80–0.88. For money, aggregate present bias ($\beta_m$) is near zero, but there is substantial heterogeneity, with roughly equal numbers of participants exhibiting present bias and future bias. At the individual level, roughly three quarters of all participants correctly anticipate the direction of their bias in both domains, even if not its full magnitude.

Lexical proficiency is a multifaceted phenomenon that greatly impacts human judgments of writing quality. However, the importance of collocations’ contribution to proficiency assessment has received less attention than that of single words, despite collocations’ essential role in language production. This study, therefore, investigated how aspects of collocational proficiency affect the ratings that examiners give to English learner essays. To do so, collocational features related to sophistication and accuracy were manipulated in a set of argumentative essays. Examiners then rated the texts and provided rationales for their choices. The findings revealed that the use of lower-frequency words significantly and positively impacted the experts’ ratings. When used as part of collocations, such words then provided a small yet significant additional boost to ratings. Notably, there was no significant effect for increased collocational accuracy. These findings suggest that low-frequency words within collocations are particularly salient to examiners and deserving of pedagogic focus.

Recent work on political divisions in the mass public has identified several manifestations of polarization linked to different types of attitudes, orientations, and behaviors. Of these, affective polarization and perceived polarization have attracted increasing attention, though we still know fairly little of the links between these variants of polarization. In this paper, we examine the association between affective and perceived polarization, with an aim toward disentangling any potential causal relationship between the two processes. Using two sets of nationally representative panel data from 1992 to 1996 and 2008 to 2009, we find evidence that affective polarization causes perceived polarization, and that perceived polarization is not related to future affective polarization. Stratifying the models by level of political information, we find that the strength and statistical significance of the relationships between past and future values of affective and perceived polarization are conditional on political sophistication: more sophisticated individuals exhibit stronger relationships.