Publications
Evaluating Consumer Confusion in Plant-Based Food Labeling: Evidence from a Randomized Experiment on Cheese Alternatives (with Gulbike Mirzaoglu and Gizem Kurt), PHAIR Journal, forthcoming.
Regulatory restrictions on the use of terms such as “cheese” for plant-based products are often justified by concerns about consumer confusion, yet empirical evidence remains limited. This study examines whether product naming and certification labels influence consumer confusion regarding plant-based alternatives. We conduct a randomized online experiment with 2,499 participants in Turkiye, recruited using quota sampling on age, gender, and region of residence. Participants are randomly assigned to one of five product conditions, including an animal-based cheese benchmark and four plant-based alternatives that vary the use of the term cheese versus block and the presence of a vegan certification mark (V-label). We measure confusion related to product content and origin, functionality, and taste. We find that confusion is substantially higher for plant-based products than for the animal-based benchmark. However, removing the term cheese does not reduce confusion; the estimate is a precisely estimated null, providing no evidence that terminology restrictions improve consumer understanding. By contrast, the presence of a V-label reduces confusion related to product origin and content by 0.39 points on a 0–6 score (approximately 14% of the baseline mean, or 0.18 standard deviations; p < 0.01), with no significant effects on perceived functionality or taste. Exploratory heterogeneity analyses show that confusion is lower among consumers with more favorable attitudes toward plant-based diets. These findings suggest that consumer confusion is likely to reflect limited knowledge of plant-based products as a category rather than the terminology used to describe them. Policies that restrict naming conventions may therefore have limited effectiveness, whereas improving the clarity and credibility of product information may offer a more effective approach to supporting informed consumer choice.
Working Papers
Fairness Covers and Ethnic Discrimination (with Alexander Cappelen, Elena Cettolin, Sigrid Suetens, and Bertil Tungodden)
Draft available soon.
We investigate the opportunistic use of fairness ideals in redistribution decisions among members of different ethnic groups. We conduct experiments with large samples of the German and French majority population, where respondents are given the option to redistribute earnings between two workers, one of whom belongs to an ethnic minority group. We implement treatments where all fairness ideals prescribe the same allocation, and ethnic preferences can therefore be easily inferred from redistribution choices, and compare them to treatments where different fairness ideals prescribe different allocations. This multiplicity of rationalizable allocations provides a fairness cover for expressing ethnic preferences through redistribution. We find that individuals with a minority background are, on average, discriminated against, but the presence of such covers does not increase the extent of discrimination in redistribution. Our estimates are precise enough to rule out even modest cover effects.
Double Redistribution Standards (with Sigrid Suetens)
This paper investigates whether in Germany and France double standards are used when compensating income inequalities due to differences in productivity. To do so, controlled experiments were conducted among general-population samples in which decision makers belonging to the majority group were confronted with an unequal distribution of income between two persons of which one belonged to the majority and the other to an ethnic minority group. One of these persons performed well in a productive task and the other performed poorly. On average, less money was redistributed from rich, well-performing majority to poor, poorly-performing minority persons than from rich, well-performing minority to poor, poorly-performing majority persons, providing evidence of a double meritocratic standard. The effect is driven by those decision makers who hold a negative attitude to ethnic diversity and vote for far-right political parties or not vote at all.
The Effect of Female Political Representation on Child Marriage and Adolescent Fertility: Evidence from Rural India
In this paper, I investigate the effect of increased female political representation on child marriage and adolescent fertility rates by utilizing a large-scale natural experiment in rural India. Using state-level variation in the timing of a policy change, I find that increased representation of women in local governance led to a significant reduction in both of these practices. In addition, I find that these reductions were accompanied by significant improvements in girls’ schooling outcomes. Anecdotal evidence suggests that one of the main mechanisms behind the findings is women leaders’ tailored policy-making and awareness-raising efforts at low levels of local governance.
The Economics of Vulnerability (with Patricio S. Dalton and Sayantan Ghosal)
Draft available soon.
This paper incorporates concerns about feeling vulnerable into an economic framework. In our setting, individuals with vulnerability concerns feel exposed when interacting with an institution that lacks a "safe" action—one that guarantees a minimum standard of respectful and dignified treatment. First, we provide an axiomatic characterization of choice functions consistent with vulnerability concerns. Second, we illustrate how these concerns influence decisions in the labor market, demonstrating that the absence of safe actions leads to higher wage thresholds for participation—even when these actions would not have been chosen if available. Third, we measure the cost of feeling vulnerable through an online experiment and find evidence of an intrinsic value for a "safe" action, even in contexts where mistreatment is not an equilibrium outcome and after controlling for risk perceptions and preferences.
Work in Progress
Racial Diversity and Redistribution (with Sigrid Suetens)
Image Concerns and Discrimination (with Sigrid Suetens and Emel Ozturk)
The Perils of Optimism in Charitable Appeals: Evidence from a Field Experiment (with Maja Adena, Katharina Dorn, Steffen Huck)
Impact of Subsidy Cut Information and Program Advertising on Charitable Giving and Ticket Purchases: A Field Experiment (with Maja Adena, Katharina Dorn, Steffen Huck)
Research Reports
How Do Muslim Consumers View Halal and Animal Welfare and Respond to Different Messages? Evidence from 15 Countries (with Gulbike Mirzaoglu and Kaleem Ahmid), Animetrics Research Report, 2026.
Toward Plant-Forward Diets in Türkiye: Consumer Motivations and Potential Barriers (with Gulbike Mirzaoglu), Animetrics Research Report, 2026.
Muslim Consumers’ Perspectives On Animal Welfare in Halal Production and Dietary Choices in Türkiye (with Gulbike Mirzaoglu), Animetrics Research Report, 2026.
Pathways to Protecting Farmed Animals in Lebanon, Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates, Kuwait, and Qatar (with Gulbike Mirzaoglu and Sezin Ekinci) Animetrics Research Report Series, 2026.
Country reports: Lebanon, Saudi Arabia, UAE, Kuwait, Qatar
I thought that wasn’t Halal! - What Muslim Consumers Know (and Don’t Know) About Animal Welfare in Halal Food Production (with Gulbike Mirzaoglu), Animetrics Research Report, 2025.