(Translated by https://www.hiragana.jp/)
How people know their risk preference
IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ajk/ajkdps/031.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

How people know their risk preference

Author

Listed:
  • Ruben C.

    (Center for Adaptive Rationality, Max Planck Institute for Human Development, Berlin, Germany)

  • Martin Brümmer

    (University of Leipzig, Germany)

  • Thomas Dohmen

    (Institute for Applied Microeconomics, University of Bonn, Germany; Institute of Labor Economics (IZA), Bonn, Germany; Maastricht University, The Netherlands; German Institute for Economic Research, Berlin, Germany; CESifo, Munich, Germany)

  • Johanna Drewelies

    (Humboldt University of Berlin, Germany)

  • Ralph Hertwig

    (Center for Adaptive Rationality, Max Planck Institute for Human Development, Berlin, Germany)

  • Gert G. Wagner

    (Center for Adaptive Rationality, Max Planck Institute for Human Development, Berlin, Germany; Institute of Labor Economics (IZA), Bonn, Germany; German Institute for Economic Research, Berlin, Germany; CESifo, Munich, Germany)

Abstract

People differ in their willingness to take risks. Recent work found that revealed preference tasks (e.g., laboratory lotteries)—a dominant class of measures—are outperformed by survey-based stated preferences, which are more stable and predict real-world risk taking across different domains. How can stated preferences, often criticised as inconsequential “cheap talk,” be more valid and predictive than controlled, incentivized lotteries? In our multimethod study, over 3,000 respondents from population samples answered a single widely used and predictive risk preference question. Respondents then explained the reasoning behind their answer. They tended to recount diagnostic behaviours and experiences, focusing on voluntary, consequential acts and experiences from which they seemed to infer their risk preference. We found that third-party readers of respondents’ brief memories and explanations reached similar inferences about respondents’ preferences, indicating the intersubjective validity of this information. Our results help unpack the self-perception behind stated risk preferences that permits people to draw upon their own understanding of what constitutes diagnostic behaviours and experiences, as revealed in high-stakes situations in the real world.

Suggested Citation

  • Ruben C. & Martin Brümmer & Thomas Dohmen & Johanna Drewelies & Ralph Hertwig & Gert G. Wagner, 2020. "How people know their risk preference," ECONtribute Discussion Papers Series 031, University of Bonn and University of Cologne, Germany.
    • Handle: RePEc:ajk:ajkdps:031
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.econtribute.de/RePEc/ajk/ajkdps/ECONtribute_031_2020.pdf
    File Function: First version, 2020
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Menon, Geeta & Raghubir, Priya & Schwarz, Norbert, 1995. "Behavioral Frequency Judgments: An Accessibility-Diagnosticity Framework," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 22(2), pages 212-228, September.
    2. Thomas Dohmen & Armin Falk & David Huffman & Uwe Sunde & Jürgen Schupp & Gert G. Wagner, 2011. "Individual Risk Attitudes: Measurement, Determinants, And Behavioral Consequences," Journal of the European Economic Association, European Economic Association, vol. 9(3), pages 522-550, June.
    3. Armin Falk & Anke Becker & Thomas Dohmen & Benjamin Enke & David Huffman & Uwe Sunde, 2018. "Global Evidence on Economic Preferences," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 133(4), pages 1645-1692.
    4. Thomas Dohmen & Simone Quercia & Jana Willrodt, 2018. "Willingness to take risk: The role of risk conception and optimism," CRC TR 224 Discussion Paper Series crctr224_2018_023, University of Bonn and University of Mannheim, Germany.
    5. Gary Charness & Thomas Garcia & Theo Offerman & Marie Claire Villeval, 2020. "Do measures of risk attitude in the laboratory predict behavior under risk in and outside of the laboratory?," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 60(2), pages 99-123, April.
    6. Armin Falk & Anke Becker & Thomas Dohmen & David Huffman & Uwe Sunde, 2023. "The Preference Survey Module: A Validated Instrument for Measuring Risk, Time, and Social Preferences," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 69(4), pages 1935-1950, April.
    7. Hans P. Binswanger, 1980. "Attitudes Toward Risk: Experimental Measurement in Rural India," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 62(3), pages 395-407.
    8. Blair, Edward & Burton, Scot, 1987. "Cognitive Processes Used by Survey Respondents to Answer Behavioral Frequency Questions," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 14(2), pages 280-288, September.
    9. David Richter & Jürgen Schupp, 2012. "SOEP Innovation Sample (SOEP-IS): Description, Structure and Documentation," SOEPpapers on Multidisciplinary Panel Data Research 463, DIW Berlin, The German Socio-Economic Panel (SOEP).
    10. Marco Caliendo & Frank Fossen & Alexander Kritikos, 2014. "Personality characteristics and the decisions to become and stay self-employed," Small Business Economics, Springer, vol. 42(4), pages 787-814, April.
    11. Marco Caliendo & Frank Fossen & Alexander Kritikos, 2009. "Risk attitudes of nascent entrepreneurs–new evidence from an experimentally validated survey," Small Business Economics, Springer, vol. 32(2), pages 153-167, February.
    12. repec:cup:judgdm:v:14:y:2019:i:2:p:135-147 is not listed on IDEAS
    13. Christoph Engel & Alexandra Fedorets & Olga Gorelkina, 2018. "How Do Households Allocate Risk?," SOEPpapers on Multidisciplinary Panel Data Research 1000, DIW Berlin, The German Socio-Economic Panel (SOEP).
    14. Anika K. Josef & David Richter & Gregory R. Samanez-Larkin & Gert G. Wagner & Ralph Hertwig & Rui Mata, 2016. "Stability and Change in Risk-Taking Propensity across the Adult Lifespan," SOEPpapers on Multidisciplinary Panel Data Research 816, DIW Berlin, The German Socio-Economic Panel (SOEP).
    15. repec:cup:judgdm:v:1:y:2006:i::p:33-47 is not listed on IDEAS
    16. Armin Falk & Anke Becker & Thomas Dohmen & Benjamin Enke & David B. Huffman & Uwe Sunde, 2017. "Global Evidence on Economic Preferences," NBER Working Papers 23943, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    17. Galizzi, Matteo M. & Machado, Sara R. & Miniaci, Raffaele, 2016. "Temporal stability, cross-validity, and external validity of risk preferences measures: experimental evidence from a UK representative sample," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 67554, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    18. Milton Friedman & L. J. Savage, 1948. "The Utility Analysis of Choices Involving Risk," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 56(4), pages 279-279.
    19. Charles A. Holt & Susan K. Laury, 2002. "Risk Aversion and Incentive Effects," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 92(5), pages 1644-1655, December.
    20. Ferdinand M. Vieider & Mathieu Lefebvre & Ranoua Bouchouicha & Thorsten Chmura & Rustamdjan Hakimov & Michal Krawczyk & Peter Martinsson, 2015. "Common Components Of Risk And Uncertainty Attitudes Across Contexts And Domains: Evidence From 30 Countries," Journal of the European Economic Association, European Economic Association, vol. 13(3), pages 421-452, June.
    21. Rui Mata & Renato Frey & David Richter & Jürgen Schupp & Ralph Hertwig, 2018. "Risk Preference: A View from Psychology," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 32(2), pages 155-172, Spring.
    22. Friedman, Daniel & Isaac, R. Mark & James, Duncan & Sunder, Shyam, 2014. "Risky Curves: On the Empirical Failure of Expected Utility," Santa Cruz Department of Economics, Working Paper Series qt87v8k86z, Department of Economics, UC Santa Cruz.
    23. Charness, Gary & Gneezy, Uri & Imas, Alex, 2013. "Experimental methods: Eliciting risk preferences," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 87(C), pages 43-51.
    24. Harrison, Glenn W. & Rutström, E. Elisabet, 2008. "Experimental Evidence on the Existence of Hypothetical Bias in Value Elicitation Methods," Handbook of Experimental Economics Results, in: Charles R. Plott & Vernon L. Smith (ed.), Handbook of Experimental Economics Results, edition 1, volume 1, chapter 81, pages 752-767, Elsevier.
    25. Carson, Richard T. & Horowitz, John K. & Mellissinos, Melissa, 1989. "The Relationship between Desire to Reduce Risks and Factor Scores for Environmental Risks," Working Papers 197629, University of Maryland, Department of Agricultural and Resource Economics.
    26. Ann-Renée Blais & Elke U. Weber, 2006. "A Domain-Specific Risk-Taking (DOSPERT)Scale for Adult Populations," CIRANO Working Papers 2006s-24, CIRANO.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Frondel, Manuel & Osberghaus, Daniel & Sommer, Stephan, 2021. "Corona and the stability of personal traits and preferences: Evidence from Germany," ZEW Discussion Papers 21-029, ZEW - Leibniz Centre for European Economic Research.
    2. Marius Leckelt & Johannes König & David Richter & Mitja D. Back & Carsten Schröder, 2022. "The personality traits of self-made and inherited millionaires," Palgrave Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 9(1), pages 1-12, December.
    3. Baláž, Vladimír & Chen, Jason Li & Williams, Allan M. & Li, Gang, 2024. "Stability of risk and uncertainty preferences in tourism," Annals of Tourism Research, Elsevier, vol. 105(C).
    4. Rafaï, Ismaël & Blayac, Thierry & Dubois, Dimitri & Duchêne, Sébastien & Nguyen-Van, Phu & Ventelou, Bruno & Willinger, Marc, 2023. "Stated preferences outperform elicited preferences for predicting reported compliance with COVID-19 prophylactic measures," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 107(C).
    5. Walter Krämer, 2022. "Interview Gert Wagner," AStA Wirtschafts- und Sozialstatistisches Archiv, Springer;Deutsche Statistische Gesellschaft - German Statistical Society, vol. 16(2), pages 155-165, June.
    6. Felix Holzmeister & Christoph Huber & Stefan Palan, 2022. "A critical perspective on the conceptualization of risk in behavioral and experimental finance," Chapters, in: Sascha Füllbrunn & Ernan Haruvy (ed.), Handbook of Experimental Finance, chapter 30, pages 408-413, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    7. Yu, Shi & Wang, Haoran & Dong, Chaosheng, 2023. "Learning risk preferences from investment portfolios using inverse optimization," Research in International Business and Finance, Elsevier, vol. 64(C).
    8. Farid Anvari & Stephan Billinger & Pantelis P. Analytis & Vithor Rosa Franco & Davide Marchiori, 2024. "Testing the convergent validity, domain generality, and temporal stability of selected measures of people’s tendency to explore," Nature Communications, Nature, vol. 15(1), pages 1-23, December.
    9. Thomas Dohmen & Simone Quercia & Jana Willrodt, 2023. "On the psychology of the relation between optimism and risk taking," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 67(2), pages 193-214, October.
    10. Andreas C. Drichoutis & Rodolfo M. Nayga, 2022. "On the stability of risk and time preferences amid the COVID-19 pandemic," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 25(3), pages 759-794, June.
    11. Renato Frey & Shannon M. Duncan & Elke U. Weber, 2023. "Towards a typology of risk preference: Four risk profiles describe two-thirds of individuals in a large sample of the U.S. population," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 66(1), pages 1-17, February.
    12. Kalwij, Adriaan, 2023. "Risk preferences, preventive behaviour, and the probability of a loss: Empirical evidence from the COVID-19 pandemic," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 334(C).
    13. Bühren Christoph & Gabriel Marvin, 2023. "Performing best when it matters the most: evidence from professional handball," Journal of Quantitative Analysis in Sports, De Gruyter, vol. 19(3), pages 185-203, September.
    14. repec:grz:wpsses:2021-06 is not listed on IDEAS
    15. Christoph Buehren & Marvin Gabriel, 2021. "Performing best when it matters the most: Evidence from professional handball," MAGKS Papers on Economics 202119, Philipps-Universität Marburg, Faculty of Business Administration and Economics, Department of Economics (Volkswirtschaftliche Abteilung).
    16. Abdelaziz Alsharawy & Sheryl Ball & Alec Smith & Ross Spoon, 2021. "Fear of COVID-19 changes economic preferences: evidence from a repeated cross-sectional MTurk survey," Journal of the Economic Science Association, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 7(2), pages 103-119, December.
    17. Ranganathan, Kavitha & Lejarraga, Tomás, 2021. "Elicitation of risk preferences through satisficing," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Finance, Elsevier, vol. 32(C).

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Gary Charness & Thomas Garcia & Theo Offerman & Marie Claire Villeval, 2020. "Do measures of risk attitude in the laboratory predict behavior under risk in and outside of the laboratory?," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 60(2), pages 99-123, April.
    2. Michele Garagnani, 2023. "The predictive power of risk elicitation tasks," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 67(2), pages 165-192, October.
    3. Joshua Tasoff & Wenjie Zhang, 2022. "The Performance of Time-Preference and Risk-Preference Measures in Surveys," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 68(2), pages 1149-1173, February.
    4. Dietmar Fehr & Yannick Reichlin, 2021. "Status, Control Beliefs, and Risk-Taking," CESifo Working Paper Series 9253, CESifo.
    5. Rafaï, Ismaël & Blayac, Thierry & Dubois, Dimitri & Duchêne, Sébastien & Nguyen-Van, Phu & Ventelou, Bruno & Willinger, Marc, 2023. "Stated preferences outperform elicited preferences for predicting reported compliance with COVID-19 prophylactic measures," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 107(C).
    6. Armin Falk & Anke Becker & Thomas Dohmen & David Huffman & Uwe Sunde, 2023. "The Preference Survey Module: A Validated Instrument for Measuring Risk, Time, and Social Preferences," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 69(4), pages 1935-1950, April.
    7. Galizzi, Matteo M. & Machado, Sara R. & Miniaci, Raffaele, 2016. "Temporal stability, cross-validity, and external validity of risk preferences measures: experimental evidence from a UK representative sample," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 67554, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    8. Ranganathan, Kavitha & Lejarraga, Tomás, 2021. "Elicitation of risk preferences through satisficing," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Finance, Elsevier, vol. 32(C).
    9. Raman Kachurka & Michał Krawczyk & Joanna Rachubik, 2021. "State lottery in the lab: an experiment in external validity," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 24(4), pages 1242-1266, December.
    10. Emmanuel Kemel & Antoine Nebout & Bruno Ventelou, 2021. "To test or not to test? Risk attitudes and prescribing by French GPs," Working Papers hal-03330153, HAL.
    11. James Alm & Antoine Malézieux, 2021. "40 years of tax evasion games: a meta-analysis," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 24(3), pages 699-750, September.
    12. Dohmen, Thomas & Quercia, Simone & Willrodt, Jana, 2018. "Willingness to Take Risk: The Role of Risk Conception and Optimism," IZA Discussion Papers 11642, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    13. Naranjo, Maria A. & Alpízar, Francisco & Martinsson, Peter, 2019. "Alternatives for Risk Elicitation in the Field: Evidence from Coffee Farmers in Costa Rica," EfD Discussion Paper 19-21, Environment for Development, University of Gothenburg.
    14. Julia Ihli, Hanna & Chiputwa, Brian & Winter, Etti & Gassner, Anja, 2022. "Risk and time preferences for participating in forest landscape restoration: The case of coffee farmers in Uganda," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 150(C).
    15. Schaewitz, Johannes & Wang, Mei & Rieger, Marc Oliver, 2022. "Culture and Institutions: Long-lasting effects of communism on risk and time preferences of individuals in Europe," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 202(C), pages 785-829.
    16. Holzmeister, Felix & Stefan, Matthias, 2019. "The Risk Elicitation Puzzle Revisited: Across-Methods (In)consistency?," OSF Preprints pj9u2, Center for Open Science.
    17. Felix Holzmeister & Matthias Stefan, 2019. "The risk elicitation puzzle revisited: Across-methods (in)consistency?," Working Papers 2019-19, Faculty of Economics and Statistics, Universität Innsbruck.
    18. Areendam Chanda & Bulent Unel, 2021. "Do attitudes toward risk taking affect entrepreneurship? Evidence from second-generation Americans," Journal of Economic Growth, Springer, vol. 26(4), pages 385-413, December.
    19. Pushkar Maitra & Ananta Neelim, 2021. "Behavioural characteristics, stability of preferences and entrepreneurial success," Chapters, in: Ananish Chaudhuri (ed.), A Research Agenda for Experimental Economics, chapter 5, pages 93-118, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    20. Felix Holzmeister & Matthias Stefan, 2021. "The risk elicitation puzzle revisited: Across-methods (in)consistency?," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 24(2), pages 593-616, June.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    risk preferences; self-report; self-perception;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • D80 - Microeconomics - - Information, Knowledge, and Uncertainty - - - General
    • D81 - Microeconomics - - Information, Knowledge, and Uncertainty - - - Criteria for Decision-Making under Risk and Uncertainty
    • D91 - Microeconomics - - Micro-Based Behavioral Economics - - - Role and Effects of Psychological, Emotional, Social, and Cognitive Factors on Decision Making
    • D01 - Microeconomics - - General - - - Microeconomic Behavior: Underlying Principles

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:ajk:ajkdps:031. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: ECONtribute Office (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.econtribute.de .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.