Economic Rationality, Risk Presentation, and Retirement Portfolio Choice

Hazel Bateman (), Christine Ebling (), John Geweke, Jordan Louviere (), Stephen Satchell () and Susan Thorp
Additional contact information
Hazel Bateman: Centre for Pensions and Superannuation and ARC Centre of Excellence in Population Ageing Research, Australian School of Business, University of New South Wales
Christine Ebling: Centre for the Study of Choice, University of Technology Sydney
Jordan Louviere: Centre for the Study of Choice, University of Technology Sydney
Stephen Satchell: Trinity College, University of Cambridge and University of Sydney

No 201121, Working Papers from ARC Centre of Excellence in Population Ageing Research (CEPAR), Australian School of Business, University of New South Wales

Abstract: This research studies the propensity of individuals to violate implications of expected utility maximization in allocating retirement savings within a compulsory defined contribution retirement plan. The paper develops the implications and describes the construction and administration of a discrete choice experiment to almost 1200 members of Australia's mandatory retirement savings scheme. The experiment finds overall rates of violation of roughly 25%, and substantial variation in rates, depending on the presentation of investment risk and the characteristics of the participants. Presentations based on frequency of returns below or above a threshold generate more violations than do presentations based on the probability of returns below or above thresholds. Individuals with low numeracy skills, assessed as part of the experiment, are several times more likely to violate implications of the conventional expected utility model than those with high numeracy skills. Older individuals are substantially less likely to violate these restrictions, when risk is presented in terms of event frequency, than are younger individuals. The results pose significant questions for public policy, in particular compulsory defined contribution retirement schemes, where the future welfare of participants in these schemes depends on quantitative decision-making skills that a significant number of them do not possess.

Keywords: Discrete choice; retirement savings; investment risk, household finance, financial literacy (search for similar items in EconPapers)
JEL-codes: D14 G23 G28 (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Pages: 38 pages
Date: 2011-05
References: View references in EconPapers View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations:

Downloads: (external link)
http://www.cepar.edu.au/media/62136/economic_ratio ... portfolio_choice.pdf First version, 2011 (application/pdf)
Our link check indicates that this URL is bad, the error code is: 404 Not Found (http://www.cepar.edu.au/media/62136/economic_rationality__risk_presentation__and_retirement_portfolio_choice.pdf [301 Moved Permanently]--> https://www.cepar.edu.au/media/62136/economic_rationality__risk_presentation__and_retirement_portfolio_choice.pdf)

Related works:
Working Paper: Economic Rationality, Risk Presentation, and Retirement Portfolio Choice (2011)
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:asb:wpaper:201121

Access Statistics for this paper

More papers in Working Papers from ARC Centre of Excellence in Population Ageing Research (CEPAR), Australian School of Business, University of New South Wales Contact information at EDIRC.
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Elena Capatina ( this e-mail address is bad, please contact ).