A Theoretical and Experimental Appraisal of Five Risk Elicitation Methods

Paolo Crosetto and Antonio Filippin

No 2013-009, Jena Economics Research Papers from Friedrich-Schiller-University Jena

Abstract: We perform a comparative analysis of five incentivized tasks used to elicit risk preferences. Theoretically, we compare the elicitation methods in terms of completeness of the range of the estimates as well as their precision, the likelihood of triggering loss aversion, and problems arising when multiple choices are required. Using original data from a homogeneous population, we experimentally investigate the distribution of estimated risk preferences, whether they differ by gender, and the complexity of the tasks. We do so using both non-parametric tests and a structural model estimated with maximum likelihood. We find that the estimated risk aversion parameters vary greatly across tasks and that gender differences appear only when the task is more likely to trigger loss aversion.

Keywords: Risk attitudes; Elicitation methods; Experiment (search for similar items in EconPapers)
JEL-codes: C81 C91 D81 (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Date: 2013-02-19
New Economics Papers: this item is included in nep-evo, nep-exp and nep-upt
References: View references in EconPapers View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations: View citations in EconPapers (46)

Downloads: (external link)
https://oweb.b67.uni-jena.de/Papers/jerp2013/wp_2013_009.pdf (application/pdf)

Related works:
Working Paper: A Theoretical and Experimental Appraisal of Five Risk Elicitation Methods (2013)
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:jrp:jrpwrp:2013-009

Access Statistics for this paper

More papers in Jena Economics Research Papers from Friedrich-Schiller-University Jena
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Markus Pasche ().