In both the SPD and the SMP, many of the questions are tailored toward matters that are of policy relevance at the time of the survey. Further, we use the fact that the respondents are market professionals with a good understanding of finance and economics to ask direct and at times technically complex questions. In this regard, the surveys contrast with the SCE, which uses language that is accessible to respondents with no economic or financial training.41  37  See Armantier et al. (2016). 38  Using a standard test of the difference between two distributions, the change from September to January is significant at the 1 percent level. The change from April to May has a “p-value” of 16 percent. 39  This dispersion implies that random samples of small size (less than one thousand) will exhibit variability even if the underlying population distribution of inflation expectations remains constant. 40  Correia-Golay, Friedman, and McMorrow (2013) provide an introduction to the SPD. 41  Many surveys of market participants do not use their technical sophistication to the extent necessary to produce robust measurement of expectations. For example, currently many surveys ask market participants to identify the FOMC meeting at which the next increase in the fed funds target range will most likely occur. This question implicitly assumes that the next rate change will be an increase; moreover, eliciting expectations about the most likely meeting when the number of future meetings is large is particularly uninformative.
When choosing between the two investments, the respondent seeking to maximize her payoff should switch investments at most once, and if so, should switch from the one yielding a nominal return to the inflation-protected investment sooner, the higher her inflation expectations.31 We found that the choices in the financially incentivized experiment were indeed meaningfully related to respondents’ inflation expectations, on average. Differences in reported uncertainty were also associated with different choices in the experiment, in the direction predicted by theory. Deviations from expected utility maximization were more likely  29  The observed heterogeneity of expectations is important for policy purposes, since we find that agents with different characteristics act on their inflation beliefs and update their expectations in distinct ways. 30  Armantier et al. (2015). 31  This is an agent’s optimal choice under expected payoff maximization. We also show that the respondent should switch sooner to the inflation-protected investment, the higher her risk aversion and the more uncertainty she expresses in her inflation expectations. BIS central bankers’ speeches  9  to occur for respondents with low education, as well as those with low numerical and financial literacy. We were able to repeat the experiment with the same respondents six months later. We found that individual changes in expectations were significantly associated with changes in how early respondents switched between investments, and that not only the direction but also the magnitude of these changes was consistent with a simple expected utility maximization framework.