IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/inm/ordeca/v6y2009i2p57-74.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Impact of Presentation Format and Self-Reported Risk Aversion on Revealed Skewness Preferences

Author

Listed:
  • Dennis Vrecko

    (Finance Center Münster, DIA Research Group for Retirement Savings, University of Münster, 48143 Münster, Germany)

  • Alexander Klos

    (Finance Center Münster, DIA Research Group for Retirement Savings, University of Münster, 48143 Münster, Germany)

  • Thomas Langer

    (Finance Center Münster, DIA Research Group for Retirement Savings, University of Münster, 48143 Münster, Germany)

Abstract

This paper reports the results of an experiment on the revealed preference for skewness in a comparison of continuous return distributions. We find that revealed preferences are highly sensitive to the way asset risks are communicated. Whereas probability density functions lead to a pronounced preference for left-skewed distributions, the opposite is true for cumulative distribution functions. Systematic misperceptions of the variance cannot explain the sensitivity of preferences to the presentation format. Part of the preference for positive skewness when risks are communicated through probability density functions is due to a systematic misestimation of the expected return. We also find that self-reported risk aversion, a measure of risk attitude commonly used in practice, is a valuable predictor of skewness preferences. Individuals that judge themselves as more risk averse show a stronger preference for right skewness.

Suggested Citation

  • Dennis Vrecko & Alexander Klos & Thomas Langer, 2009. "Impact of Presentation Format and Self-Reported Risk Aversion on Revealed Skewness Preferences," Decision Analysis, INFORMS, vol. 6(2), pages 57-74, June.
    • Handle: RePEc:inm:ordeca:v:6:y:2009:i:2:p:57-74
    DOI: 10.1287/deca.1090.0141
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.1287/deca.1090.0141
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1287/deca.1090.0141?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
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Markus K. Brunnermeier & Jonathan A. Parker & Christian Gollier, 2007. "Optimal Beliefs, Asset Prices, and the Preference for Skewed Returns," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 97(2), pages 159-165, May.
    2. Unser, Matthias, 2000. "Lower partial moments as measures of perceived risk: An experimental study," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 21(3), pages 253-280, June.
    3. Laurent E. Calvet & John Y. Campbell & Paolo Sodini, 2007. "Down or Out: Assessing the Welfare Costs of Household Investment Mistakes," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 115(5), pages 707-747, October.
    4. Arjan B. Berkelaar & Roy Kouwenberg & Thierry Post, 2004. "Optimal Portfolio Choice under Loss Aversion," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 86(4), pages 973-987, November.
    5. Fred D. Arditti, 1967. "Risk And The Required Return On Equity," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 22(1), pages 19-36, March.
    6. 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..
    7. Joseph Golec & Maurry Tamarkin, 1998. "Bettors Love Skewness, Not Risk, at the Horse Track," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 106(1), pages 205-225, February.
    8. Kjetil Høyland & Stein W. Wallace, 2001. "Generating Scenario Trees for Multistage Decision Problems," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 47(2), pages 295-307, February.
    9. Black, Fischer & Scholes, Myron S, 1973. "The Pricing of Options and Corporate Liabilities," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 81(3), pages 637-654, May-June.
    10. Tobias Broenner & Rene Levinsky & Jianying Qiu, 2007. "A Note on Skewness Seeking: An Experimental Analysis," Jena Economics Research Papers 2007-079, Friedrich-Schiller-University Jena.
    11. Nicholas Barberis & Ming Huang, 2008. "Stocks as Lotteries: The Implications of Probability Weighting for Security Prices," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 98(5), pages 2066-2100, December.
    12. Birnbaum, Michael H & Navarrete, Juan B, 1998. "Testing Descriptive Utility Theories: Violations of Stochastic Dominance and Cumulative Independence," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 17(1), pages 49-78, October.
    13. Todd Mitton & Keith Vorkink, 2007. "Equilibrium Underdiversification and the Preference for Skewness," The Review of Financial Studies, Society for Financial Studies, vol. 20(4), pages 1255-1288.
    14. John Butler & James Dyer & Jiammin Jia, 2005. "An Empirical Investigation of the Assumptions of Risk-Value Models," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 30(2), pages 133-156, January.
    15. Elke U. Weber & Richard A. Milliman, 1997. "Perceived Risk Attitudes: Relating Risk Perception to Risky Choice," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 43(2), pages 123-144, February.
    16. Campbell R. Harvey & Akhtar Siddique, 2000. "Conditional Skewness in Asset Pricing Tests," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 55(3), pages 1263-1295, June.
    17. Kraus, Alan & Litzenberger, Robert H, 1976. "Skewness Preference and the Valuation of Risk Assets," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 31(4), pages 1085-1100, September.
    18. Tversky, Amos & Thaler, Richard H, 1990. "Anomalies: Preference Reversals," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 4(2), pages 201-211, Spring.
    19. Daniel G. Goldstein & Eric J. Johnson & William F. Sharpe, 2008. "Choosing Outcomes versus Choosing Products: Consumer-Focused Retirement Investment Advice," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 35(3), pages 440-456, August.
    20. 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. Dennis Vrecko & Thomas Langer, 2013. "What Are Investors Willing to Pay to Customize Their Investment Product?," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 59(8), pages 1855-1870, August.
    2. Ranjit Singh & Jayashree Bhattacharjee & K. Kajol, 2024. "Factors Affecting Risk Perception in Respect of Equity Shares: A Social Network Analysis Approach," Vision, , vol. 28(3), pages 386-399, June.
    3. François Desmoulins-Lebeault & Luc Meunier, 2018. "Moment Risks: Investment for Self and for a Firm," Decision Analysis, INFORMS, vol. 15(4), pages 242-266, December.
    4. Matteo Benuzzi & Matteo Ploner, 2024. "Skewness-seeking behavior and financial investments," Annals of Finance, Springer, vol. 20(1), pages 129-165, March.
    5. L. Robin Keller, 2010. "From the Editor..," Decision Analysis, INFORMS, vol. 7(3), pages 235-237, September.
    6. Zeynep Erkin & Matthew D. Bailey & Lisa M. Maillart & Andrew J. Schaefer & Mark S. Roberts, 2010. "Eliciting Patients' Revealed Preferences: An Inverse Markov Decision Process Approach," Decision Analysis, INFORMS, vol. 7(4), pages 358-365, December.
    7. Jeffrey M. Keisler & Patrick S. Noonan, 2012. "Communicating Analytic Results: A Tutorial for Decision Consultants," Decision Analysis, INFORMS, vol. 9(3), pages 274-292, September.
    8. L. Robin Keller & Ali Abbas & J. Eric Bickel & Vicki M. Bier & David V. Budescu & John C. Butler & Enrico Diecidue & Robin L. Dillon-Merrill & Raimo P. Hämäläinen & Kenneth C. Lichtendahl & Jason R. W, 2012. "From the Editors ---Brainstorming, Multiplicative Utilities, Partial Information on Probabilities or Outcomes, and Regulatory Focus," Decision Analysis, INFORMS, vol. 9(4), pages 297-302, December.
    9. L. Robin Keller & Kelly M. Kophazi, 2009. "From the Editors..," Decision Analysis, INFORMS, vol. 6(2), pages 53-56, June.
    10. Alen Nosić & Martin Weber, 2010. "How Riskily Do I Invest? The Role of Risk Attitudes, Risk Perceptions, and Overconfidence," Decision Analysis, INFORMS, vol. 7(3), pages 282-301, September.
    11. Nolte, Sven & Schneider, Judith C., 2018. "How price path characteristics shape investment behavior," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 154(C), pages 33-59.

    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. Sévi, Benoît, 2013. "An empirical analysis of the downside risk-return trade-off at daily frequency," Economic Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 31(C), pages 189-197.
    2. Lambert, M. & Hübner, G., 2013. "Comoment risk and stock returns," Journal of Empirical Finance, Elsevier, vol. 23(C), pages 191-205.
    3. Turan G. Bali & Nusret Cakici & Robert F. Whitelaw, 2009. "Maxing Out: Stocks as Lotteries and the Cross-Section of Expected Returns," NBER Working Papers 14804, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    4. Bali, Turan G. & Cakici, Nusret & Whitelaw, Robert F., 2011. "Maxing out: Stocks as lotteries and the cross-section of expected returns," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 99(2), pages 427-446, February.
    5. Jondeau, Eric & Zhang, Qunzi & Zhu, Xiaoneng, 2019. "Average skewness matters," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 134(1), pages 29-47.
    6. Marie-Hélène Broihanne & Maxime Merli & Patrick Roger, 2016. "Diversification, gambling and market forces," Review of Quantitative Finance and Accounting, Springer, vol. 47(1), pages 129-157, July.
    7. Bressan, Silvia & Weissensteiner, Alex, 2021. "The financial conglomerate discount: Insights from stock return skewness," International Review of Financial Analysis, Elsevier, vol. 74(C).
    8. Eric Jondeau & Xuewu Wang & Zhipeng Yan & Qunzi Zhang, 2020. "Skewness and index futures return," Journal of Futures Markets, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 40(11), pages 1648-1664, November.
    9. Trung H. Le & Apostolos Kourtis & Raphael Markellos, 2023. "Modeling skewness in portfolio choice," Journal of Futures Markets, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 43(6), pages 734-770, June.
    10. Yigit Atilgan & K. Ozgur Demirtas & A. Doruk Gunaydin & Imra Kirli, 2023. "Average skewness in global equity markets," International Review of Finance, International Review of Finance Ltd., vol. 23(2), pages 245-271, June.
    11. Ahmed, Walid M.A., 2020. "Is there a risk-return trade-off in cryptocurrency markets? The case of Bitcoin," Journal of Economics and Business, Elsevier, vol. 108(C).
    12. Paul Schneider & Christian Wagner & Josef Zechner, 2020. "Low‐Risk Anomalies?," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 75(5), pages 2673-2718, October.
    13. T. Clifton Green & Byoung-Hyoun Hwang, 2012. "Initial Public Offerings as Lotteries: Skewness Preference and First-Day Returns," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 58(2), pages 432-444, February.
    14. Ohk, Seungbin & Ju, Biung-Ghi, 2021. "Capitalizing on prospect theory value: The Asian developed stock markets," Japan and the World Economy, Elsevier, vol. 57(C).
    15. Xu, Zhongxiang & Li, Xiafei & Chevapatrakul, Thanaset & Gao, Ning, 2022. "Default risk, macroeconomic conditions, and the market skewness risk premium," Journal of International Money and Finance, Elsevier, vol. 127(C).
    16. Wei Tang & Tianhao Wu & Liheng Xu, 2017. "Skewness Preference and IPO Anomalies in China," Annals of Economics and Finance, Society for AEF, vol. 18(1), pages 173-199, May.
    17. Melisa Ozdamar & Levent Akdeniz & Ahmet Sensoy, 2021. "Lottery-like preferences and the MAX effect in the cryptocurrency market," Financial Innovation, Springer;Southwestern University of Finance and Economics, vol. 7(1), pages 1-27, December.
    18. Zhong, Angel & Gray, Philip, 2016. "The MAX effect: An exploration of risk and mispricing explanations," Journal of Banking & Finance, Elsevier, vol. 65(C), pages 76-90.
    19. Xu, Zhongxiang & Chevapatrakul, Thanaset & Li, Xiafei, 2019. "Return asymmetry and the cross section of stock returns," Journal of International Money and Finance, Elsevier, vol. 97(C), pages 93-110.
    20. Byun, Suk-Joon & Kim, Da-Hea, 2016. "Gambling preference and individual equity option returns," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 122(1), pages 155-174.

    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:inm:ordeca:v:6:y:2009:i:2:p:57-74. 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: Chris Asher (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/inforea.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.