IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/soceco/v60y2016icp1-8.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Risk aversion for decisions under uncertainty: Are there gender differences?

Author

Listed:
  • Sarin, Rakesh
  • Wieland, Alice

Abstract

It has become well accepted that women are more risk averse than men. For objective probability gambles, typically used in eliciting risk aversion, we find women generally have a lower valuation than men, thus exhibiting greater risk aversion. This paper investigates whether this finding extends to decisions under uncertainty – where probabilities are not given and individuals may assign different probabilities to the same event (e.g. outcomes of award shows or sporting events).We find that for decisions under uncertainty, men and women value the bets similarly, both before and after controlling for participants' subjective probabilities.

Suggested Citation

  • Sarin, Rakesh & Wieland, Alice, 2016. "Risk aversion for decisions under uncertainty: Are there gender differences?," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 60(C), pages 1-8.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:soceco:v:60:y:2016:i:c:p:1-8
    DOI: 10.1016/j.socec.2015.10.007
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2214804315001305
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.socec.2015.10.007?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Catherine C. Eckel & Philip J. Grossman, 2002. "Sex Differences and Statistical Stereotyping in Attitudes Toward Financial Risk," Monash Economics Working Papers archive-03, Monash University, Department of Economics.
    2. Camerer, Colin F & Hogarth, Robin M, 1999. "The Effects of Financial Incentives in Experiments: A Review and Capital-Labor-Production Framework," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 19(1-3), pages 7-42, December.
    3. Mohammed Abdellaoui & Aurelien Baillon & Laetitia Placido & Peter P. Wakker, 2011. "The Rich Domain of Uncertainty: Source Functions and Their Experimental Implementation," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 101(2), pages 695-723, April.
    4. Tversky, Amos & Kahneman, Daniel, 1992. "Advances in Prospect Theory: Cumulative Representation of Uncertainty," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 5(4), pages 297-323, October.
    5. Jehoshua Eliashberg & John R. Hauser, 1985. "A Measurement Error Approach for Modeling Consumer Risk Preference," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 31(1), pages 1-25, January.
    6. Alison L. Booth & Patrick Nolen, 2012. "Gender differences in risk behaviour: does nurture matter?," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 122(558), pages 56-78, February.
    7. Peter P. Wakker, 2008. "Explaining the characteristics of the power (CRRA) utility family," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 17(12), pages 1329-1344, December.
    8. Chow, Clare Chua & Sarin, Rakesh K, 2001. "Comparative Ignorance and the Ellsberg Paradox," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 22(2), pages 129-139, March.
    9. Sarin, Rakesh K & Wakker, Peter, 1992. "A Simple Axiomatization of Nonadditive Expected Utility," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 60(6), pages 1255-1272, November.
    10. Gregory W. Fischer & Ziv Carmon & Dan Ariely & Gal Zauberman, 1999. "Goal-Based Construction of Preferences: Task Goals and the Prominence Effect," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 45(8), pages 1057-1075, August.
    11. repec:cup:judgdm:v:9:y:2014:i:6:p:558-571 is not listed on IDEAS
    12. 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.
    13. repec:cup:judgdm:v:5:y:2010:i:5:p:411-419 is not listed on IDEAS
    14. Schmeidler, David, 1989. "Subjective Probability and Expected Utility without Additivity," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 57(3), pages 571-587, May.
    15. Catherine C. Eckel & Philip J. Grossman, 2008. "Forecasting Risk Attitudes: An Experimental Study Using Actual and Forecast Gamble Choices," Monash Economics Working Papers archive-01, Monash University, Department of Economics.
    16. Robin Hogarth & Mariona Portell & Anna Cuxart, 2007. "What risks do people perceive in everyday life? A perspective gained from the experience sampling method (ESM)," Economics Working Papers 1005, Department of Economics and Business, Universitat Pompeu Fabra.
    17. French, Kenneth R & Poterba, James M, 1991. "Investor Diversification and International Equity Markets," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 81(2), pages 222-226, May.
    18. Helga Fehr-Duda & Manuele Gennaro & Renate Schubert, 2006. "Gender, Financial Risk, and Probability Weights," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 60(2), pages 283-313, May.
    19. Rachel Croson & Uri Gneezy, 2009. "Gender Differences in Preferences," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 47(2), pages 448-474, June.
    20. repec:cup:judgdm:v:1:y:2006:i::p:48-63 is not listed on IDEAS
    21. Wieland, Alice & Sarin, Rakesh, 2012. "Domain specificity of sex differences in competition," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 83(1), pages 151-157.
    22. Mohammed Abdellaoui & Han Bleichrodt & Corina Paraschiv, 2007. "Loss Aversion Under Prospect Theory: A Parameter-Free Measurement," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 53(10), pages 1659-1674, October.
    23. Yaari, Menahem E., 1969. "Some remarks on measures of risk aversion and on their uses," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 1(3), pages 315-329, October.
    24. John C. Hershey & Paul J. H. Schoemaker, 1985. "Probability Versus Certainty Equivalence Methods in Utility Measurement: Are they Equivalent?," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 31(10), pages 1213-1231, October.
    25. James G. March & Zur Shapira, 1987. "Managerial Perspectives on Risk and Risk Taking," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 33(11), pages 1404-1418, November.
    26. Narat Charupat & Richard Deaves & Travis Derouin & Marcelo Klotzle & Peter Miu, 2013. "Emotional balance and probability weighting," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 75(1), pages 17-41, July.
    27. Beattie, Jane & Loomes, Graham, 1997. "The Impact of Incentives upon Risky Choice Experiments," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 14(2), pages 155-168, March.
    28. Renate Schubert, 1999. "Financial Decision-Making: Are Women Really More Risk-Averse?," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 89(2), pages 381-385, May.
    29. Peter P. Wakker, 2008. "Explaining the characteristics of the power (CRRA) utility family," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 17(12), pages 1329-1344.
    30. repec:cup:judgdm:v:5:y:2010:i:3:p:159-163 is not listed on IDEAS
    31. Heath, Chip & Tversky, Amos, 1991. "Preference and Belief: Ambiguity and Competence in Choice under Uncertainty," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 4(1), pages 5-28, 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. Toritseju Begho & Kelvin Balcombe, 2023. "Attitudes to Risk and Uncertainty: New Insights From an Experiment Using Interval Prospects," SAGE Open, , vol. 13(3), pages 21582440231, July.
    2. Michael A. Leeds & Eva Marikova Leeds, 2024. "I’ll Take Gender Differences for $400: Using Jeopardy! to Analyze Attitudes Toward Risk," Eastern Economic Journal, Palgrave Macmillan;Eastern Economic Association, vol. 50(3), pages 374-399, June.
    3. Axel Freudenberger & Yoav Wachsman, 2021. "Framing and Loss Aversion Tested in the Context of an Academic Examination," Economics Bulletin, AccessEcon, vol. 41(3), pages 2012-2020.
    4. Sah, Nilesh B. & Adhikari, Hari P. & Krolikowski, Marcin W. & Malm, James & Nguyen, Thanh T., 2022. "CEO gender and risk aversion: Further evidence using the composition of firm’s cash," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Finance, Elsevier, vol. 33(C).
    5. Rocco Caferra & Andrea Morone & Piergiuseppe Morone, 2024. "Inequalities under Ambiguity," Working papers 115, Società Italiana di Economia Pubblica.
    6. Yao, Zheying & Rabbani, Abed G., 2021. "Association between investment risk tolerance and portfolio risk: The role of confidence level," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Finance, Elsevier, vol. 30(C).
    7. Goran Calic & Moren Lévesque & Anton Shevchenko, 2024. "On why women-owned businesses take more time to secure microloans," Small Business Economics, Springer, vol. 63(3), pages 917-938, October.
    8. Anbar, Adem & Eker, Melek, 2019. "The Effect of Sociodemographic Variables and Love of Money on Financial Risk Tolerance of Bankers," Business and Economics Research Journal, Uludag University, Faculty of Economics and Administrative Sciences, vol. 10(4), pages 855-866, July.
    9. Wookjae Heo & Abed G. Rabbani & Jae Min Lee, 2021. "Mediation between financial risk tolerance and equity ownership: assessing the role of financial knowledge underconfidence," Journal of Financial Services Marketing, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 26(3), pages 169-180, September.
    10. Brent J. Davis, 2018. "Does financial well-being affect portfolio construction? Evidence from an online survey," Economics Bulletin, AccessEcon, vol. 38(1), pages 362-366.
    11. Júlio Lobão, 2024. "The Influence of Gender on Individuals’ Ability to Predict Their Own Risk Tolerance: Evidence from a European Country," Administrative Sciences, MDPI, vol. 14(3), pages 1-16, March.
    12. Hao Wang & Jan Fidrmuc & Qi Luo & Mingzhong Luo, 2018. "What Stayers Do? Capital Endowments and On-Farm Transitions in Rural China," CESifo Working Paper Series 7306, CESifo.
    13. Olga Lainidi & Eirini Karakasidou & Anthony Montgomery, 2022. "Dark Triad, Impulsiveness and Honesty-Humility in the Prisoner’s Dilemma Game: The Moderating Role of Gender," Merits, MDPI, vol. 2(4), pages 1-13, November.
    14. Bernd Frick & Clarissa Laura Maria Spiess Bru & Daniel Kaimann, 2023. "Are Women (Really) More Lenient? Gender Differences in Expert Evaluations," Working Papers Dissertations 106, Paderborn University, Faculty of Business Administration and Economics.
    15. Luís Pacheco & Júlio Lobão & Sílvia Coelho, 2023. "Gender and Risk Aversion: Evidence from a Natural Experiment," Games, MDPI, vol. 14(3), pages 1-16, June.
    16. Daniel Stockemer & Friedrich Plank & Arne Niemann, 2021. "The COVID‐19 pandemic and government responses: A gender perspective on differences in public opinion," Social Science Quarterly, Southwestern Social Science Association, vol. 102(5), pages 2383-2393, September.
    17. Dilmaghani, Maryam, 2020. "Gender differences in performance under time constraint: Evidence from chess tournaments," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 89(C).
    18. Nguyen, Canh Phuc, 2022. "Uncertainty and gender inequality: A global investigation," The Quarterly Review of Economics and Finance, Elsevier, vol. 86(C), pages 31-47.

    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. Kpegli, Yao Thibaut & Corgnet, Brice & Zylbersztejn, Adam, 2023. "All at once! A comprehensive and tractable semi-parametric method to elicit prospect theory components," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 104(C).
    2. Nelson, Julie A., 2012. "Are Women Really More Risk-Averse than Men?," Working Papers 179104, Tufts University, Global Development and Environment Institute.
    3. Booij, Adam S. & van de Kuilen, Gijs, 2009. "A parameter-free analysis of the utility of money for the general population under prospect theory," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 30(4), pages 651-666, August.
    4. Han Bleichrodt & Simon Grant & Jingni Yang, 2023. "Testing Hurwicz Expected Utility," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 91(4), pages 1393-1416, July.
    5. Alice Wieland & James Sundali & Markus Kemmelmeier & Rakesh Sarin, 2014. "Gender differences in the endowment effect: Women pay less, but won't accept less," Judgment and Decision Making, Society for Judgment and Decision Making, vol. 9(6), pages 558-571, November.
    6. repec:cup:judgdm:v:9:y:2014:i:6:p:558-571 is not listed on IDEAS
    7. David Blake & Edmund Cannon & Douglas Wright, 2021. "Quantifying loss aversion: Evidence from a UK population survey," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 63(1), pages 27-57, August.
    8. Aurélien Baillon & Laure Cabantous & Peter Wakker, 2012. "Aggregating imprecise or conflicting beliefs: An experimental investigation using modern ambiguity theories," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 44(2), pages 115-147, April.
    9. Golo-Friedrich Bauermeister & Daniel Hermann & Oliver Musshoff, 2018. "Consistency of determined risk attitudes and probability weightings across different elicitation methods," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 84(4), pages 627-644, June.
    10. Tamás Csermely & Alexander Rabas, 2016. "How to reveal people’s preferences: Comparing time consistency and predictive power of multiple price list risk elicitation methods," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 53(2), pages 107-136, December.
    11. Holzmeister, Felix & Stefan, Matthias, 2019. "The Risk Elicitation Puzzle Revisited: Across-Methods (In)consistency?," OSF Preprints pj9u2, Center for Open Science.
    12. González-Jiménez, Víctor, 2024. "Incentive design for reference-dependent preferences," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 221(C), pages 493-518.
    13. Crosetto, P. & Filippin, A., 2017. "Safe options induce gender differences in risk attitudes," Working Papers 2017-05, Grenoble Applied Economics Laboratory (GAEL).
    14. Paolo Crosetto & Antonio Filippin, 2023. "Safe options and gender differences in risk attitudes," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 66(1), pages 19-46, February.
    15. Paolo Crosetto & Antonio Filippin, 2013. "The “bomb” risk elicitation task," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 47(1), pages 31-65, August.
    16. Adam Booij & Bernard Praag & Gijs Kuilen, 2010. "A parametric analysis of prospect theory’s functionals for the general population," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 68(1), pages 115-148, February.
    17. Ferdinand M. Vieider & Clara Villegas-Palacio & Peter Martinsson & Milagros Mejía, 2016. "Risk Taking For Oneself And Others: A Structural Model Approach," Economic Inquiry, Western Economic Association International, vol. 54(2), pages 879-894, April.
    18. Felix Holzmeister & Matthias Stefan, 2021. "The risk elicitation puzzle revisited: Across-methods (in)consistency?," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 24(2), pages 593-616, June.
    19. Anwesha Bandyopadhyay & Lutfunnahar Begum & Philip J. Grossman, 2021. "Gender differences in the stability of risk attitudes," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 63(2), pages 169-201, October.
    20. Aurélien Baillon & Zhenxing Huang & Asli Selim & Peter P. Wakker, 2018. "Measuring Ambiguity Attitudes for All (Natural) Events," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 86(5), pages 1839-1858, September.
    21. Steve Agnew & Neil Harrison, 2017. "The Role of Gender, Cognitive Attributes and Personality on Willingness to Take Risks," Business and Economic Research, Macrothink Institute, vol. 7(1), pages 1-16, June.

    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:eee:soceco:v:60:y:2016:i:c:p:1-8. 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: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/inca/620175 .

    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.