IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/zbw/icirwp/1614.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

"And lead us not into temptation": Presentation formats and the choice of risky alternatives

Author

Listed:
  • Glenzer, Franca
  • Gründl, Helmut
  • Wilde, Christian

Abstract

This paper uses laboratory experiments to provide a systematic analysis of how different presentation formats affect individuals' investment decisions. The results indicate that the type of presentation as well as personal characteristics influence both, the consistency of decisions and the riskiness of investment choices. However, while personal characteristics have a larger impact on consistency, the chosen risk level is determined more by framing effects. On the level of personal characteristics, participants' decisions show that better financial literacy and a better understanding of the presentation format enhance consistency and thus decision quality. Moreover, female participants on average make less consistent decisions and tend to prefer less risky alternatives. On the level of framing dimensions, subjects choose riskier investments when possible outcomes are shown in absolute values rather than rates of return and when the loss potential is less obvious. In particular, reducing the emphasis on downside risk and upside potential simultaneously leads to a substantial increase in risk taking.

Suggested Citation

  • Glenzer, Franca & Gründl, Helmut & Wilde, Christian, 2014. ""And lead us not into temptation": Presentation formats and the choice of risky alternatives," ICIR Working Paper Series 16/14, Goethe University Frankfurt, International Center for Insurance Regulation (ICIR).
  • Handle: RePEc:zbw:icirwp:1614
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.econstor.eu/bitstream/10419/98163/1/788266152.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Schmitz, Hendrik & Ziebarth, Nicolas R., 2011. "In Absolute or Relative Terms? How Framing Prices Affects the Consumer Price Sensitivity of Health Plan Choice," IZA Discussion Papers 6241, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    2. van Rooij, Maarten & Lusardi, Annamaria & Alessie, Rob, 2011. "Financial literacy and stock market participation," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 101(2), pages 449-472, August.
    3. Shlomo Benartzi & Richard H. Thaler, 1999. "Risk Aversion or Myopia? Choices in Repeated Gambles and Retirement Investments," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 45(3), pages 364-381, March.
    4. Matthew Rabin, 1998. "Psychology and Economics," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 36(1), pages 11-46, March.
    5. Powell, Melanie & Ansic, David, 1997. "Gender differences in risk behaviour in financial decision-making: An experimental analysis," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 18(6), pages 605-628, November.
    6. Urs Fischbacher, 2007. "z-Tree: Zurich toolbox for ready-made economic experiments," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 10(2), pages 171-178, June.
    7. Daniel Kahneman & Amos Tversky, 2013. "Prospect Theory: An Analysis of Decision Under Risk," World Scientific Book Chapters, in: Leonard C MacLean & William T Ziemba (ed.), HANDBOOK OF THE FUNDAMENTALS OF FINANCIAL DECISION MAKING Part I, chapter 6, pages 99-127, World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd..
    8. William Remus, 1984. "An Empirical Investigation of the Impact of Graphical and Tabular Data Presentations on Decision Making," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 30(5), pages 533-542, May.
    9. Tiffe, Achim & Feigl, Michael & Fritze, Jürgen & Götz, Veruschka & Grunert, Claudia & Jaroszek, Lena & Rohn, Ilonka, 2012. "Ausgestaltung eines Produktinformationsblatts für zertifizierte Altersvorsorge- und Basisrentenverträge," EconStor Research Reports 57575, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics.
    10. Diacon, Stephen & Hasseldine, John, 2007. "Framing effects and risk perception: The effect of prior performance presentation format on investment fund choice," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 28(1), pages 31-52, January.
    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. Thomas Köhne & Christoph Brömmelmeyer, 2018. "The New Insurance Distribution Regulation in the EU—A Critical Assessment from a Legal and Economic Perspective," The Geneva Papers on Risk and Insurance - Issues and Practice, Palgrave Macmillan;The Geneva Association, vol. 43(4), pages 704-739, October.
    2. Meyer, Steffen & Urban, Linda & Ahlswede, Sophie, 2015. "Does a personalized feedback on investment success mitigate investment mistakes of private investors? Answers from large natural field experiment," VfS Annual Conference 2015 (Muenster): Economic Development - Theory and Policy 112988, Verein für Socialpolitik / German Economic Association.
    3. Andreas Richter & Jochen Ruß & Stefan Schelling, 2019. "Insurance customer behavior: Lessons from behavioral economics," Risk Management and Insurance Review, American Risk and Insurance Association, vol. 22(2), pages 183-205, July.
    4. Syed Aliya Zahera & Rohit Bansal, 2018. "Do investors exhibit behavioral biases in investment decision making? A systematic review," Qualitative Research in Financial Markets, Emerald Group Publishing Limited, vol. 10(2), pages 210-251, May.
    5. Meyer, Steffen & Urban, Linda & Ahlswede, Sophie, 2016. "Does feedback on personal investment success help?," SAFE Working Paper Series 157, Leibniz Institute for Financial Research SAFE.

    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. K.S. Muehlfeld & G.U. Weitzel & A. van Witteloostuijn, 2012. "Fight or freeze? Individual differences in investors’ motivational systems and trading in experimental asset markets," Working Papers 12-18, Utrecht School of Economics.
    2. Binswanger, Johannes, 2012. "Life cycle saving: Insights from the perspective of bounded rationality," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 56(3), pages 605-623.
    3. Tian, Ye & Li, Yudi & Sun, Jian, 2022. "Stick or carrot for traffic demand management? Evidence from experimental economics," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 160(C), pages 235-254.
    4. repec:cup:judgdm:v:12:y:2017:i:2:p:118-127 is not listed on IDEAS
    5. Diacon, Stephen & Hasseldine, John, 2007. "Framing effects and risk perception: The effect of prior performance presentation format on investment fund choice," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 28(1), pages 31-52, January.
    6. Friesen, Lana & Earl, Peter E., 2015. "Multipart tariffs and bounded rationality: An experimental analysis of mobile phone plan choices," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 116(C), pages 239-253.
    7. Christine Kaufmann & Martin Weber & Emily Haisley, 2013. "The Role of Experience Sampling and Graphical Displays on One's Investment Risk Appetite," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 59(2), pages 323-340, July.
    8. Hermann, Daniel & Mußhoff, Oliver & Rau, Holger A., 2019. "The disposition effect when deciding on behalf of others," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 74(C).
    9. Cornil, Yann & Hardisty, David J. & Bart, Yakov, 2019. "Easy, breezy, risky: Lay investors fail to diversify because correlated assets feel more fluent and less risky," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 153(C), pages 103-117.
    10. Kay Blaufus & Michael Milde, 2021. "Tax Misperceptions and the Effect of Informational Tax Nudges on Retirement Savings," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 67(8), pages 5011-5031, August.
    11. Sautner, Zacharias & Weber, Martin, 2005. "Stock options and employee behavior," Papers 05-26, Sonderforschungsbreich 504.
    12. Matteo Ploner, 2017. "Hold on to it? An experimental analysis of the disposition effect," Judgment and Decision Making, Society for Judgment and Decision Making, vol. 12(2), pages 118-127, March.
    13. Lunn, Pete & McGowan, Féidhlim & Howard, Noel, 2018. "Do some financial product features negatively affect consumer decisions? a review of evidence," Research Series, Economic and Social Research Institute (ESRI), number RS78, August.
    14. Eduard Marinov, 2017. "The 2017 Nobel Prize in Economics," Economic Thought journal, Bulgarian Academy of Sciences - Economic Research Institute, issue 6, pages 117-159.
    15. Committee, Nobel Prize, 2017. "Richard H. Thaler: Integrating Economics with Psychology," Nobel Prize in Economics documents 2017-1, Nobel Prize Committee.
    16. Schmidt, Ulrich & Friedl, Andreas & Eichenseer, Michael & Lima de Miranda, Katharina, 2021. "Social comparison and gender differences in financial risk taking," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 192(C), pages 58-72.
    17. Tse, Alan & Friesen, Lana & Kalaycı, Kenan, 2016. "Complexity and asset legitimacy in retirement investment," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 60(C), pages 35-48.
    18. Borsboom, Charlotte & Zeisberger, Stefan, 2020. "What makes an investment risky? An analysis of price path characteristics," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 169(C), pages 92-125.
    19. Engel, Christoph & Reuben, Alicja, 2015. "The people's hired guns? Experimentally testing the motivating force of a legal frame," International Review of Law and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 43(C), pages 67-82.
    20. Muehlfeld, Katrin & Weitzel, Utz & van Witteloostuijn, Arjen, 2013. "Fight or freeze? Individual differences in investors’ motivational systems and trading in experimental asset markets," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 34(C), pages 195-209.
    21. Döbeli, Barbara & Vanini, Paolo, 2010. "Stated and revealed investment decisions concerning retail structured products," Journal of Banking & Finance, Elsevier, vol. 34(6), pages 1400-1411, June.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Behavioral finance; Decision under risk; Framing effects;
    All these keywords.

    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:zbw:icirwp:1614. 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: ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/icffmde.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.