IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/beh/jbepv1/v6y2022is1p85-92.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The effect of additional background risk on mixed risk behavior

Author

Listed:
  • Irene Mussio

    (Newcastle University Business School, United Kingdom)

  • Angela C.M. de Oliveira

    (Department of Resource Economics, University of Massachusetts Amherst, United States)

Abstract

Although economics has mainly focused on the measurement of risk aversion, this is only a partial measure of an individual's risk profile. Further, background risks may also affect an individual's decisions. We use a risk apportionment approach to measure individual higher order risk attitudes before and after an increase in background risk. We focus on risk aversion, prudence and temperance. Results indicate that around 17\% of our sample is mixed risk-loving in our online experiment. After the increase in background risk, the proportion of mixed risk-averse individuals increases, driven by an increase in risk-averse choices. Our findings suggest that one-size-fits-all policies should be flexible to incorporate the heterogeneity of individual risk profiles, as well as changes in individual and overall risk conditions.

Suggested Citation

  • Irene Mussio & Angela C.M. de Oliveira, 2022. "The effect of additional background risk on mixed risk behavior," Journal of Behavioral Economics for Policy, Society for the Advancement of Behavioral Economics (SABE), vol. 6(S1), pages 85-92, July.
    • Handle: RePEc:beh:jbepv1:v:6:y:2022:i:s1:p:85-92
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://sabeconomics.org/journal/RePEc/beh/JBEPv1/articles/JBEP-6-S1-8.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Nicola Fuchs-Schundeln & Matthias Schundeln, 2005. "Precautionary Savings and Self-Selection - Evidence from the German Reunification "Experiment"," Harvard Institute of Economic Research Working Papers 2069, Harvard - Institute of Economic Research.
    2. Cardak, Buly A. & Wilkins, Roger, 2009. "The determinants of household risky asset holdings: Australian evidence on background risk and other factors," Journal of Banking & Finance, Elsevier, vol. 33(5), pages 850-860, May.
    3. Eeckhoudt, Louis & Schlesinger, Harris & Tsetlin, Ilia, 2009. "Apportioning of risks via stochastic dominance," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 144(3), pages 994-1003, May.
    4. Kimball, Miles S, 1993. "Standard Risk Aversion," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 61(3), pages 589-611, May.
    5. David Roodman, 2011. "Fitting fully observed recursive mixed-process models with cmp," Stata Journal, StataCorp LP, vol. 11(2), pages 159-206, June.
    6. Giuseppe Attanasi & Nikolaos Georgantzís & Valentina Rotondi & Daria Vigani, 2018. "Lottery- and survey-based risk attitudes linked through a multichoice elicitation task," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 84(3), pages 341-372, May.
    7. Louis Eeckhoudt & Harris Schlesinger, 2006. "Putting Risk in Its Proper Place," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 96(1), pages 280-289, March.
    8. Arthur Snow & Ronald S. Warren, 2005. "Ambiguity about Audit Probability, Tax Compliance, and Taxpayer Welfare," Economic Inquiry, Western Economic Association International, vol. 43(4), pages 865-871, October.
    9. Guenter Franke & Harris Schlesinger & Richard C. Stapleton, 2018. "Risk†Taking†Neutral Background Risks," Journal of Risk & Insurance, The American Risk and Insurance Association, vol. 85(2), pages 335-353, June.
    10. Luigi Guiso & Monica Paiella, 2008. "Risk Aversion, Wealth, and Background Risk," Journal of the European Economic Association, MIT Press, vol. 6(6), pages 1109-1150, December.
    11. Cary Deck & Harris Schlesinger, 2010. "Exploring Higher Order Risk Effects," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 77(4), pages 1403-1420.
    12. Edwards, Ryan D, 2008. "Health Risk and Portfolio Choice," Journal of Business & Economic Statistics, American Statistical Association, vol. 26, pages 472-485.
    13. Marco Alifano & Giuseppe Attanasi & Fabio Iannelli & Faredj Cherikh & Antonio Iannelli, 2020. "COVID-19 pandemic: a European perspective on health economic policies," Journal of Behavioral Economics for Policy, Society for the Advancement of Behavioral Economics (SABE), vol. 4(S), pages 35-43, June.
    14. Miriam Krieger & Thomas Mayrhofer, 2017. "Prudence and prevention: an economic laboratory experiment," Applied Economics Letters, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 24(1), pages 19-24, January.
    15. Alexander Haering & Timo Heinrich & Thomas Mayrhofer, 2020. "Exploring The Consistency Of Higher Order Risk Preferences," International Economic Review, Department of Economics, University of Pennsylvania and Osaka University Institute of Social and Economic Research Association, vol. 61(1), pages 283-320, February.
    16. David A. Love & Paul A. Smith, 2010. "Does health affect portfolio choice?," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 19(12), pages 1441-1460, December.
    17. Cary Deck & Harris Schlesinger, 2014. "Consistency of Higher Order Risk Preferences," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 82(5), pages 1913-1943, September.
    18. Charles N. Noussair & Stefan T. Trautmann & Gijs van de Kuilen, 2014. "Higher Order Risk Attitudes, Demographics, and Financial Decisions," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 81(1), pages 325-355.
    19. Giuseppe Attanasi & Christian Gollier & Aldo Montesano & Noemi Pace, 2014. "Eliciting ambiguity aversion in unknown and in compound lotteries: a smooth ambiguity model experimental study," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 77(4), pages 485-530, December.
    20. Andersen, David J. & Lau, Richard R., 2018. "Pay Rates and Subject Performance in Social Science Experiments Using Crowdsourced Online Samples," Journal of Experimental Political Science, Cambridge University Press, vol. 5(3), pages 217-229, December.
    21. Chen Lian & Yueran Ma & Carmen Wang, 2019. "Low Interest Rates and Risk-Taking: Evidence from Individual Investment Decisions," The Review of Financial Studies, Society for Financial Studies, vol. 32(6), pages 2107-2148.
    22. Jay J. Van Bavel & Katherine Baicker & Paulo S. Boggio & Valerio Capraro & Aleksandra Cichocka & Mina Cikara & Molly J. Crockett & Alia J. Crum & Karen M. Douglas & James N. Druckman & John Drury & Oe, 2020. "Using social and behavioural science to support COVID-19 pandemic response," Nature Human Behaviour, Nature, vol. 4(5), pages 460-471, May.
    23. Sebastian Ebert & Daniel Wiesen, 2014. "Joint measurement of risk aversion, prudence, and temperance," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 48(3), pages 231-252, June.
    24. Charles A. Holt & Susan K. Laury, 2002. "Risk Aversion and Incentive Effects," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 92(5), pages 1644-1655, December.
    25. David Crainich & Louis Eeckhoudt & Alain Trannoy, 2013. "Even (Mixed) Risk Lovers Are Prudent," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 103(4), pages 1529-1535, June.
    26. Gollier, Christian & Pratt, John W, 1996. "Risk Vulnerability and the Tempering Effect of Background Risk," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 64(5), pages 1109-1123, September.
    27. Trautmann, Stefan T. & Kuilen, Gijs van de, 2018. "Higher order risk attitudes: A review of experimental evidence," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 103(C), pages 108-124.
    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. Irene Mussio & Maximiliano Sosa Andrés & Abdul H Kidwai, 2023. "Higher order risk attitudes in the time of COVID-19: an experimental study," Oxford Economic Papers, Oxford University Press, vol. 75(1), pages 163-182.
    2. Kanchan Joshi & Thiagu Ranganathan & Ram Ranjan, 2021. "Exploring Higher Order Risk Preferences of Farmers in a Water-Scarce Region: Evidence from a Field Experiment in West Bengal, India," Journal of Quantitative Economics, Springer;The Indian Econometric Society (TIES), vol. 19(2), pages 317-344, June.
    3. Attema, Arthur E. & l’Haridon, Olivier & van de Kuilen, Gijs, 2019. "Measuring multivariate risk preferences in the health domain," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 64(C), pages 15-24.
    4. Haering, Alexander, 2021. "Framing decisions in experiments on higher-order risk preferences," Ruhr Economic Papers 913, RWI - Leibniz-Institut für Wirtschaftsforschung, Ruhr-University Bochum, TU Dortmund University, University of Duisburg-Essen.
    5. Timo Heinrich & Jason Shachat, 2020. "The development of risk aversion and prudence in Chinese children and adolescents," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 61(3), pages 263-287, December.
    6. Han (H.) Bleichrodt & Paul van Bruggen, 2018. "Reflection for higher order risk preferences," Tinbergen Institute Discussion Papers 18-079/I, Tinbergen Institute.
    7. Timo Heinrich & Thomas Mayrhofer, 2018. "Higher-order risk preferences in social settings," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 21(2), pages 434-456, June.
    8. Colasante, Annarita & Riccetti, Luca, 2020. "Risk aversion, prudence and temperance: It is a matter of gap between moments," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Finance, Elsevier, vol. 25(C).
    9. Trautmann, Stefan T. & Kuilen, Gijs van de, 2018. "Higher order risk attitudes: A review of experimental evidence," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 103(C), pages 108-124.
    10. Schneider, Sebastian O. & Sutter, Matthias, 2020. "Higher Order Risk Preferences: Experimental Measures, Determinants and Related Field Behavior," VfS Annual Conference 2020 (Virtual Conference): Gender Economics 224643, Verein für Socialpolitik / German Economic Association.
    11. Thomas Mayrhofer & Hendrik Schmitz, 2020. "Prudence and prevention - Empirical evidence," Working Papers CIE 134, Paderborn University, CIE Center for International Economics.
    12. Konstantinos Georgalos & Ivan Paya & David Peel, 2023. "Higher order risk attitudes: new model insights and heterogeneity of preferences," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 26(1), pages 145-192, March.
    13. Georgalos, Konstantinos & Paya, Ivan & Peel, David, 2024. "The Kőszegi–Rabin expectations-based model and risk-apportionment tasks for elicitation of higher order risk preferences," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 224(C), pages 749-770.
    14. Ivan Paya & David A. Peel & Konstantinos Georgalos, 2023. "On the predictions of cumulative prospect theory for third and fourth order risk preferences," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 95(2), pages 337-359, August.
    15. Christian Gollier & James Hammitt & Nicolas Treich, 2013. "Risk and choice: A research saga," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 47(2), pages 129-145, October.
    16. Camille Cornand & Maria Alejandra Erazo Diaz & Béatrice Rey & Adam Zylbersztejn, 2023. "On the robustness of higher order attitudes to ambiguity framing," Working Papers 2318, Groupe d'Analyse et de Théorie Economique Lyon St-Étienne (GATE Lyon St-Étienne), Université de Lyon.
    17. van Bruggen, Paul & Laeven, Roger J. A. & van de Kuilen, Gijs, 2024. "Higher-Order Risk Attitudes for Non-Expected Utility," Other publications TiSEM c566934e-eb60-4b4b-a972-4, Tilburg University, School of Economics and Management.
    18. Aurélien Baillon & Harris Schlesinger & Gijs van de Kuilen, 2018. "Measuring higher order ambiguity preferences," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 21(2), pages 233-256, June.
    19. Bottasso, Anna & Duchêne, Sébastien & Guerci, Eric & Hanaki, Nobuyuki & Noussair, Charles N., 2022. "Higher order risk attitudes of financial experts," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Finance, Elsevier, vol. 34(C).
    20. Eric Cardella & Carl Kitchens, 2017. "The impact of award uncertainty on settlement negotiations," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 20(2), pages 333-367, June.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    risk aversion; background risk; higher-order risk attitudes; prudence; temperance;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • C91 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Design of Experiments - - - Laboratory, Individual Behavior
    • D81 - Microeconomics - - Information, Knowledge, and Uncertainty - - - Criteria for Decision-Making under Risk and Uncertainty
    • I12 - Health, Education, and Welfare - - Health - - - Health Behavior

    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:beh:jbepv1:v:6:y:2022:i:s1:p:85-92. 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: SABE (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/sabeeea.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.