@article {MICHAUD2020386,
	title = {Understanding joint retirement},
	journal = {Journal of Economic Behavior \& Organization},
	volume = {173},
	year = {2020},
	pages = {386 - 401},
	abstract = {Evidence from different sources shows that spouses{\textquoteright} retirement decisions are correlated. Retirement policies affecting individuals in couples are therefore also likely to affect behavior of their spouses. It is therefore important to account for joint features in modeling retirement. This paper studies a structural collective model of labor supply and retirement of both partners in a couple with interdependent preferences, imperfect knowledge of preferences of the spouse, and subjective expectations about the future. We propose a novel method to estimate preferences and the intra-household bargaining process, which relies on stated preferences data collected in the Health and Retirement Study. Respondents were asked to choose between hypothetical retirement trajectories describing the retirement ages and replacement rates of both spouses from three perspectives: considering their own preferences only, the preferences of their spouse only, or the most likely decision for the household. With these data, all model parameters are identified and potential sources of joint retirement can be disentangled. Our results suggest that males misperceive their wives{\textquoteright} preferences, overestimating their disutility of work. Our estimates correct for this. We find strong positive correlations between preferences for joint leisure (leisure complementarity) of the two partners. Counterfactual simulations with stylized retirement paths suggest that the leisure complementarities explain a substantial part of joint retirement, much more than correlation in unobserved heterogeneity or potential wage rates.},
	keywords = {Collective models, Identification, Leisure complementarity, Stated choices},
	issn = {0167-2681},
	doi = {https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jebo.2019.07.013},
	author = {Pierre-Carl Michaud and Arthur [Van Soest] and Luc Bissonnette}
}
@article {10213,
	title = {Understanding Joint Retirement},
	journal = {National Bureau of Economic Research Working Paper Series},
	volume = {No. 25030},
	year = {2018},
	note = {Author contact info:Pierre-Carl MichaudHEC Montr{\'e}al3000 C{\^o}te-Sainte-Catherine RoadMontr{\'e}al (Qu{\'e}bec), Canada H3T 2A7Tel: 514/340-6466E-Mail: pierre-carl.michaud@hec.caArthur van SoestTilburg UniversityP.O. Box 901535000 LE TilburgThe NetherlandsE-Mail: a.h.o.vansoest@uvt.nlLuc BissonnetteUniversite LavalPavillon J.-A.-DeS{\`e}ve 1025avenue des Sciences-HumainesQuebec G1V0A6CanadaE-Mail: luc.bissonnette@ecn.ulaval.ca},
	month = {09/2018},
	abstract = {Evidence from different sources shows that spouses{\textquoteright} retirement decisions are correlated. Retirement policies affecting individuals in couples are therefore also likely to affect behavior of their spouses. It is therefore important to account for joint features in modeling retirement. This paper studies a structural collective model of labor supply and retirement of both partners in a couple with interdependent preferences, imperfect knowledge of preferences of the spouse, and subjective expectations about the future. We propose a novel method to estimate preferences and the intra-household bargaining process, which relies on stated preferences data collected in the Health and Retirement Study. Respondents were asked to choose between hypothetical retirement trajectories describing the retirement ages and replacement rates of both spouses from three perspectives: considering their own preferences only, the preferences of their spouse only, or the most likely decision for the household. With these data, all model parameters are identified and potential sources of joint retirement can be disentangled. We find that males misperceive their wives{\textquoteright} preferences, overestimating their disutility of work. Our estimates correct for this bias. They suggest that correlation in unobserved heterogeneity components of the partners{\textquoteright} marginal utility of leisure explains a large share of joint retirement decisions. We also find significant positive complementarities in leisure, but this explains a much smaller part of joint retirement.},
	keywords = {Joint Retirement, Retirement},
	doi = {10.3386/w25030},
	url = {http://www.nber.org/papers/w25030},
	author = {Pierre-Carl Michaud and Arthur H.O. vanSoest and Luc Bissonnette}
}
@article {9075,
	title = {Individual survival curves comparing subjective and observed mortality risks.},
	journal = {Health Economics},
	volume = {26},
	year = {2017},
	month = {12/2017},
	pages = {e285-e303},
	abstract = {We compare individual survival curves constructed from objective (actual mortality) and elicited subjective information (probability of survival to a given target age). We develop a methodology to estimate jointly subjective and objective individual survival curves accounting for rounding on subjective reports of perceived survival. We make use of the long follow-up period in the Health and Retirement Study and the high quality of mortality data to estimate individual survival curves that feature both observed and unobserved heterogeneity. This allows us to compare objective and subjective estimates of remaining life expectancy for various groups and compare welfare effects of objective and subjective mortality risk using the life cycle model of consumption. We find that subjective and objective hazards are not the same. The median welfare loss from misperceptions of mortality risk when annuities are not available is 7\% of current wealth at age 65 whereas more than 25\% of respondents have losses larger than 60\% of wealth. When annuities are available and exogenously given, the welfare loss is substantially lower.},
	keywords = {Mortality, NDI, Survival curves},
	issn = {1099-1050},
	doi = {10.1002/hec.3506},
	author = {Luc Bissonnette and Michael D Hurd and Pierre-Carl Michaud}
}
