Gender effects for loss aversion: Yes, no, maybe?

被引:24
作者
Bouchouicha, Ranoua [1 ]
Deer, Lachlan [2 ]
Eid, Ashraf Galal [3 ]
McGee, Peter [4 ]
Schoch, Daniel [5 ]
Stojic, Hrvoje [6 ]
Ygosse-Battisti, Jolanda [7 ]
Vieider, Ferdinand M. [8 ]
机构
[1] Univ Reading, Henley Business Sch, Reading, Berks, England
[2] Univ Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland
[3] Qatar Univ, Finance & Econ Dept, Doha, Qatar
[4] Univ Arkansas, Fayetteville, AR 72701 USA
[5] Univ Nottingham, Malaysia Campus, Semenyih, Malaysia
[6] Univ Pompeu Fabra, Barcelona, Spain
[7] Sao Paolo Sch Business, Sao Paulo, Brazil
[8] Univ Ghent, Dept Econ, Ghent, Belgium
关键词
Loss aversion; Gender effects; Risk preferences; Prospect theory; EXPECTED UTILITY-THEORY; PROSPECT-THEORY; RISK-TAKING; HETEROGENEITY; PROBABILITY; ANOMALIES; DECISION;
D O I
10.1007/s11166-019-09315-3
中图分类号
F8 [财政、金融];
学科分类号
0202 ;
摘要
Gender effects in risk taking have attracted much attention by economists, and remain debated. Loss aversion-the stylized finding that a given loss carries substantially greater weight than a monetarily equivalent gain-is a fundamental driver of risk aversion. We deploy four definitions of loss aversion commonly used in the literature to investigate gender effects. Even though the definitions only differ in subtle ways, we find women to be more loss averse than men according to one definition, while another definition results in no gender differences, and the remaining two definitions point to women being less loss averse than men. Conceptually, these contradictory effects can be organized by systematic measurement error resulting from model mis-specifications relative to the true underlying decision process.
引用
收藏
页码:171 / 184
页数:14
相关论文
共 44 条
[1]   A tractable method to measure utility and loss aversion under prospect theory [J].
Abdellaoui, Mohammed ;
Bleichrodt, Han ;
L'Haridon, Olivier .
JOURNAL OF RISK AND UNCERTAINTY, 2008, 36 (03) :245-266
[2]   Loss aversion under prospect theory: A parameter-free measurement [J].
Abdellaoui, Mohammed ;
Bleichrodt, Han ;
Paraschiv, Corina .
MANAGEMENT SCIENCE, 2007, 53 (10) :1659-1674
[3]   Measuring Loss Aversion under Ambiguity: A Method to Make Prospect Theory Completely Observable [J].
Abdellaoui, Mohammed ;
Bleichrodt, Han ;
L'Haridon, Olivier ;
van Dolder, Dennie .
JOURNAL OF RISK AND UNCERTAINTY, 2016, 52 (01) :1-20
[4]   RISK AVERSION RELATES TO COGNITIVE ABILITY: PREFERENCES OR NOISE? [J].
Andersson, Ola ;
Holm, Hakan J. ;
Tyran, Jean-Robert ;
Wengstrom, Erik .
JOURNAL OF THE EUROPEAN ECONOMIC ASSOCIATION, 2016, 14 (05) :1129-1154
[5]   Deciding for Others Reduces Loss Aversion [J].
Andersson, Ola ;
Holm, Hakan J. ;
Tyran, Jean-Robert ;
Wengstrom, Erik .
MANAGEMENT SCIENCE, 2016, 62 (01) :29-36
[6]   Affirmative Action Policies Promote Women and Do Not Harm Efficiency in the Laboratory [J].
Balafoutas, Loukas ;
Sutter, Matthias .
SCIENCE, 2012, 335 (6068) :579-582
[7]   Violations of cumulative prospect theory in mixed gambles with moderate probabilities [J].
Baltussen, Guido ;
Post, Thierry ;
van Vliet, Pim .
MANAGEMENT SCIENCE, 2006, 52 (08) :1288-1290
[8]   MYOPIC LOSS AVERSION AND THE EQUITY PREMIUM PUZZLE [J].
BENARTZI, S ;
THALER, RH .
QUARTERLY JOURNAL OF ECONOMICS, 1995, 110 (01) :73-92
[9]   A parametric analysis of prospect theory's functionals for the general population [J].
Booij, Adam S. ;
van Praag, Bernard M. S. ;
van de Kuilen, Gijs .
THEORY AND DECISION, 2010, 68 (1-2) :115-148
[10]   Loss averse behavior [J].
Brooks, P ;
Zank, H .
JOURNAL OF RISK AND UNCERTAINTY, 2005, 31 (03) :301-325