IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pone00/0244881.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Acute stress does not affect economic behavior in the experimental laboratory

Author

Listed:
  • Róbert F Veszteg
  • Kaori Yamakawa
  • Tetsuya Matsubayashi
  • Michiko Ueda

Abstract

We report statistical results from a laboratory experiment in which participants were required to make decisions with monetary consequences in several solitary and interactive situations under acute stress. Our study follows the tradition of behavioral and experimental economics in selecting the experimental situations and incorporates elements from medical and psychological research in the way stress is induced and measured. It relies on a larger sample, with 192 volunteers, than previous studies to achieve higher statistical power. The main conclusion, drawn from binary comparisons between the treatment and reference groups, is that acute stress does not have a significant impact on cognitive skills, strategic sophistication, risk attitudes, altruism, cooperativeness, or nastiness. Regression analysis, controlling for psycho-social characteristics, corroborates these findings, while also suggesting that acute stress significantly decreases men’s risk aversion (as measured by a lottery-choice risk-elicitation task).

Suggested Citation

  • Róbert F Veszteg & Kaori Yamakawa & Tetsuya Matsubayashi & Michiko Ueda, 2021. "Acute stress does not affect economic behavior in the experimental laboratory," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 16(1), pages 1-24, January.
    • Handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0244881
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0244881
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0244881
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0244881&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pone.0244881?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. Leder, Johannes & Häusser, Jan Alexander & Mojzisch, Andreas, 2015. "Exploring the underpinnings of impaired strategic decision-making under stress," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 49(C), pages 133-140.
    2. Jana Cahlíková & Lubomír Cingl, 2017. "Risk preferences under acute stress," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 20(1), pages 209-236, March.
    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. Sooter, Nina M. & Brandon, Rajna Gibson & Ugazio, Giuseppe, 2024. "Honesty is predicted by moral values and economic incentives but is unaffected by acute stress," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Finance, Elsevier, vol. 41(C).
    2. Gorny, Paul M. & Groos, Eva & Strobel, Christina, 2024. "Do Personalized AI Predictions Change Subsequent Decision-Outcomes? The Impact of Human Oversight," MPRA Paper 121065, University Library of Munich, Germany.

    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. Martina Vecchi & Nicolai Vitt, 2024. "Stress or failure? An experimental protocol to distinguish the environmental determinants of decision-making," Journal of the Economic Science Association, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 10(2), pages 485-503, December.
    2. Mihaela DIACONU & Amalia DUTU, 2020. "Crisis, Uncertainty, Risk And Consumer Behavior: A Psycho-Economic Approach," Scientific Bulletin - Economic Sciences, University of Pitesti, vol. 19(2), pages 3-8.
    3. W. Eric Lee, 2024. "How Consideration of Future Consequences, Prior Gain or Loss, Personal Risk Profile, and Justification Affect Risk–Payoff Preferences," JRFM, MDPI, vol. 17(2), pages 1-16, February.
    4. Kate Robinson & Bernard McKenna & David Rooney, 2022. "The Relationship of Risk to Rules, Values, Virtues, and Moral Complexity: What We can Learn from the Moral Struggles of Military Leaders," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 179(3), pages 749-766, September.
    5. E. Cettolin & P. S. Dalton & W. J. Kop & W. Zhang, 2020. "Cortisol meets GARP: the effect of stress on economic rationality," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 23(2), pages 554-574, June.
    6. Lopera, Maria Adelaida & Marchand, Steeve, 2018. "Peer effects and risk-taking among entrepreneurs: Lab-in-the-field evidence," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 150(C), pages 182-201.
    7. repec:jdm:journl:v:17:y:2022:i:4:p:883-936 is not listed on IDEAS
    8. Mika Akesaka & Peter Eibich & Chie Hanaoka & Hitoshi Shigeoka, 2023. "Temporal Instability of Risk Preference among the Poor: Evidence from Payday Cycles," American Economic Journal: Applied Economics, American Economic Association, vol. 15(4), pages 68-99, October.
    9. Steiner, Jakub & Netzer, Nick & Robson, Arthur & Kocourek, Pavel, 2021. "Endogenous Risk Attitudes," CEPR Discussion Papers 16190, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    10. Emma Boswell Dean & Frank Schilbach & Heather Schofield, 2017. "Poverty and Cognitive Function," NBER Chapters, in: The Economics of Poverty Traps, pages 57-118, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    11. Timofei Nestik, 2018. "The Psychological Aspects of Corporate Foresight," Foresight and STI Governance (Foresight-Russia till No. 3/2015), National Research University Higher School of Economics, vol. 12(2), pages 78-90.
    12. Kettlewell, Nathan, 2019. "Risk preference dynamics around life events," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 162(C), pages 66-84.
    13. Sören Harrs & Lara Marie Müller & Bettina Rockenbach, 2021. "How Optimistic and Pessimistic Narratives about COVID-19 Impact Economic Behavior," ECONtribute Discussion Papers Series 091, University of Bonn and University of Cologne, Germany.
    14. Lohmann, Paul M. & Gsottbauer, Elisabeth & You, Jing & Kontoleon, Andreas, 2023. "Anti-social behaviour and economic decision-making: Panel experimental evidence in the wake of COVID-19," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 206(C), pages 136-171.
    15. Emil Persson & Kinga Barrafrem & Andreas Meunier & Gustav Tinghög, 2019. "The effect of decision fatigue on surgeons' clinical decision making," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 28(10), pages 1194-1203, October.
    16. Johannes Leder & Leonhard Schilbach & Andreas Mojzisch, 2016. "Strategic Decision-Making and Social Skills: Integrating Behavioral Economics and Social Cognition Research," IJFS, MDPI, vol. 4(4), pages 1-14, November.
    17. Michael Kirchler & David Andersson & Caroline Bonn & Magnus Johannesson & Erik Ø. Sørensen & Matthias Stefan & Gustav Tinghög & Daniel Västfjäll, 2017. "The effect of fast and slow decisions on risk taking," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 54(1), pages 37-59, February.
    18. López-Guzmán, Silvia & Sautua, Santiago I., 2024. "Effects of a fearful emotional state on financial decisions in the presence of prior outcome information," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 101(C).
    19. Halko, Marja-Liisa & Lappalainen, Olli & Sääksvuori, Lauri, 2021. "Do non-choice data reveal economic preferences? Evidence from biometric data and compensation-scheme choice," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 188(C), pages 87-104.
    20. Yoshiro Tsutsui & Iku Tsutsui-Kimura, 2022. "How does risk preference change under the stress of COVID-19? Evidence from Japan," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 64(2), pages 191-212, April.
    21. Bottan, Daria & McKee, Douglas & Orlov, George & McDougall, Anna, 2022. "Racial and gender achievement gaps in an economics classroom," International Review of Economics Education, Elsevier, vol. 40(C).

    More about this item

    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:plo:pone00:0244881. 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: plosone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ .

    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.