IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/exc/wpaper/2009-06.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

On the Coefficient of Variation as a Measure of Risk Sensitivity

Author

Listed:
  • James C. Cox
  • Vjollca Sadiraj

Abstract

Weber, Shafir, and Blais (2004) advocate use of the coefficient of variation (CV) as a measure of risk sensitivity and apply CV in a meta-analysis of data for risky choices by humans and animals. We critically re-examine the CV measure as either a normative or descriptive criterion for decision under risk. CV fails as a normative criterion because it violates first order stochastic dominance. Whether or not CV succeeds as a descriptive criterion depends on its consistency or inconsistency with data from experiments designed to test its distinctive properties. We report an experiment with human subjects motivated by salient monetary payoffs. The data are inconsistent with the hypothesis that the CVs of risky lotteries are a significant determinant of subjects' choices between the lotteries and certain payoffs.

Suggested Citation

  • James C. Cox & Vjollca Sadiraj, 2009. "On the Coefficient of Variation as a Measure of Risk Sensitivity," Experimental Economics Center Working Paper Series 2009-06, Experimental Economics Center, Andrew Young School of Policy Studies, Georgia State University, revised Jul 2010.
    • Handle: RePEc:exc:wpaper:2009-06
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://excen.gsu.edu/workingpapers/GSU_EXCEN_WP_2009-06.pdf
    File Function: First version, 2009
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: http://excen.gsu.edu/workingpapers/GSU_EXCEN_WP_2010-04.pdf
    File Function: Revised version, 2010
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Rothschild, Michael & Stiglitz, Joseph E., 1970. "Increasing risk: I. A definition," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 2(3), pages 225-243, September.
    2. Hadar, Josef & Russell, William R, 1969. "Rules for Ordering Uncertain Prospects," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 59(1), pages 25-34, March.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Hooi Hooi Lean & Michael McAleer & Wing-Keung Wong, 2013. "Risk-averse and Risk-seeking Investor Preferences for Oil Spot and Futures," Documentos de Trabajo del ICAE 2013-31, Universidad Complutense de Madrid, Facultad de Ciencias Económicas y Empresariales, Instituto Complutense de Análisis Económico, revised Aug 2013.
    2. Moshe Levy & Haim Levy, 2013. "Prospect Theory: Much Ado About Nothing?," World Scientific Book Chapters, in: Leonard C MacLean & William T Ziemba (ed.), HANDBOOK OF THE FUNDAMENTALS OF FINANCIAL DECISION MAKING Part I, chapter 7, pages 129-144, World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd..
    3. Michel M. Denuit & Louis Eeckhoudt, 2010. "A General Index of Absolute Risk Attitude," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 56(4), pages 712-715, April.
    4. Chateauneuf, Alain & Cohen, Michele & Meilijson, Isaac, 2004. "Four notions of mean-preserving increase in risk, risk attitudes and applications to the rank-dependent expected utility model," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 40(5), pages 547-571, August.
    5. Lizyayev, Andrey & Ruszczyński, Andrzej, 2012. "Tractable Almost Stochastic Dominance," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 218(2), pages 448-455.
    6. Arvanitis, Stelios & Scaillet, Olivier & Topaloglou, Nikolas, 2020. "Spanning tests for Markowitz stochastic dominance," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 217(2), pages 291-311.
    7. Gollier, Christian, 2021. "A general theory of risk apportionment," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 192(C).
    8. Bali, Turan G. & Demirtas, K. Ozgur & Levy, Haim & Wolf, Avner, 2009. "Bonds versus stocks: Investors' age and risk taking," Journal of Monetary Economics, Elsevier, vol. 56(6), pages 817-830, September.
    9. Fong, Wai Mun, 2010. "A stochastic dominance analysis of yen carry trades," Journal of Banking & Finance, Elsevier, vol. 34(6), pages 1237-1246, June.
    10. Turan G. Bali & Nusret Cakici & Fousseni Chabi-Yo, 2011. "A Generalized Measure of Riskiness," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 57(8), pages 1406-1423, August.
    11. Giora Harpaz, 1986. "Optimal Risk—Sharing Policies," The American Economist, Sage Publications, vol. 30(2), pages 37-40, October.
    12. Thomas Kourouxous & Thomas Bauer, 2019. "Violations of dominance in decision-making," Business Research, Springer;German Academic Association for Business Research, vol. 12(1), pages 209-239, April.
    13. Grant, S. & Quiggin, J., 2001. "A Model-Free Definition of Increasing Uncertainty," Discussion Paper 2001-84, Tilburg University, Center for Economic Research.
    14. Xia Han & Bin Wang & Ruodu Wang & Qinyu Wu, 2021. "Risk Concentration and the Mean-Expected Shortfall Criterion," Papers 2108.05066, arXiv.org, revised Apr 2022.
    15. Kyle Bagwell & Robert W. Staiger, 1990. "Risky R&D in Oligopolistic Product Markets," Discussion Papers 872, Northwestern University, Center for Mathematical Studies in Economics and Management Science.
    16. Rolf Aaberge, 2009. "Ranking intersecting Lorenz curves," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 33(2), pages 235-259, August.
    17. Loubergé, Henri & Malevergne, Yannick & Rey, Béatrice, 2020. "New Results for additive and multiplicative risk apportionment," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 90(C), pages 140-151.
    18. Robert J. Aumann & Roberto Serrano, 2008. "An Economic Index of Riskiness," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 116(5), pages 810-836, October.
    19. Luo, Yulei & Young, Eric R., 2009. "The Wealth Distribution And The Demand For Status," Macroeconomic Dynamics, Cambridge University Press, vol. 13(S1), pages 1-30, May.
    20. David Anderson & John Tressler, 2018. "The Impact of Citation Timing: A Framework and Examples," Review of Economics and Institutions, Università di Perugia, vol. 9(2).

    More about this item

    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:exc:wpaper:2009-06. 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: J. Todd Swarthout (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/exgsuus.html .

    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.