Cargando…

Context matters

Eliciting the level of risk aversion of experimental subjects is of crucial concern to experimenters. In the literature there are a variety of methods used for such elicitation; the concern of the experiment reported in this paper is to compare them. The methods we investigate are the following: Hol...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Zhou, Wenting, Hey, John
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Springer US 2017
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6223722/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30459523
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10683-017-9546-z
_version_ 1783369453087490048
author Zhou, Wenting
Hey, John
author_facet Zhou, Wenting
Hey, John
author_sort Zhou, Wenting
collection PubMed
description Eliciting the level of risk aversion of experimental subjects is of crucial concern to experimenters. In the literature there are a variety of methods used for such elicitation; the concern of the experiment reported in this paper is to compare them. The methods we investigate are the following: Holt–Laury price lists; pairwise choices, the Becker–DeGroot–Marschak method; allocation questions. Clearly their relative efficiency in measuring risk aversion depends upon the numbers of questions asked; but the method itself may well influence the estimated risk-aversion. While it is impossible to determine a ‘best’ method (as the truth is unknown) we can look at the differences between the different methods. We carried out an experiment in four parts, corresponding to the four different methods, with 96 subjects. In analysing the data our methodology involves fitting preference functionals; we use four, Expected Utility and Rank-Dependent Expected Utility, each combined with either a CRRA or a CARA utility function. Our results show that the inferred level of risk aversion is more sensitive to the elicitation method than to the assumed-true preference functional. Experimenters should worry most about context.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-6223722
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2017
publisher Springer US
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-62237222018-11-18 Context matters Zhou, Wenting Hey, John Exp Econ Experimental Tools Eliciting the level of risk aversion of experimental subjects is of crucial concern to experimenters. In the literature there are a variety of methods used for such elicitation; the concern of the experiment reported in this paper is to compare them. The methods we investigate are the following: Holt–Laury price lists; pairwise choices, the Becker–DeGroot–Marschak method; allocation questions. Clearly their relative efficiency in measuring risk aversion depends upon the numbers of questions asked; but the method itself may well influence the estimated risk-aversion. While it is impossible to determine a ‘best’ method (as the truth is unknown) we can look at the differences between the different methods. We carried out an experiment in four parts, corresponding to the four different methods, with 96 subjects. In analysing the data our methodology involves fitting preference functionals; we use four, Expected Utility and Rank-Dependent Expected Utility, each combined with either a CRRA or a CARA utility function. Our results show that the inferred level of risk aversion is more sensitive to the elicitation method than to the assumed-true preference functional. Experimenters should worry most about context. Springer US 2017-10-25 2018 /pmc/articles/PMC6223722/ /pubmed/30459523 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10683-017-9546-z Text en © The Author(s) 2017 Open AccessThis article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made.
spellingShingle Experimental Tools
Zhou, Wenting
Hey, John
Context matters
title Context matters
title_full Context matters
title_fullStr Context matters
title_full_unstemmed Context matters
title_short Context matters
title_sort context matters
topic Experimental Tools
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6223722/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30459523
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10683-017-9546-z
work_keys_str_mv AT zhouwenting contextmatters
AT heyjohn contextmatters