IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/metrik/v22y2011i1p79-105.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The impact of biases on simulation-based risk aggregation: modeling cognitive influences on risk assessment

Author

Listed:
  • Matthias Meyer
  • Cathérine Grisar
  • Felix Kuhnert

Abstract

This paper develops a systematic approach to quantifying the effect of judgmental biases on aggregate risk measures. Starting with the standard risk management process, we derive the areas that require expert judgment as input in order to aggregate risk into risk measures such as Earnings at Risk. We specify three possible gateways for biases and identify several psychological theories to quantify deviations of expert judgments from objective probabilities. The impact of these cognitive biases on the aggregate risk measure is investigated via Monte Carlo simulation experiments. Through experimental design, we can determine the size of both the average and the possible interaction effects of the different biases. The results show that aggregate risk is systematically underestimated if it is based on biased subjective judgment. Moreover, the existence of interaction effects indicates potential problems of simple debiasing strategies. Copyright Springer Verlag 2011

Suggested Citation

  • Matthias Meyer & Cathérine Grisar & Felix Kuhnert, 2011. "The impact of biases on simulation-based risk aggregation: modeling cognitive influences on risk assessment," Metrika: International Journal for Theoretical and Applied Statistics, Springer, vol. 22(1), pages 79-105, September.
    • Handle: RePEc:spr:metrik:v:22:y:2011:i:1:p:79-105
    DOI: 10.1007/s00187-011-0127-6
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1007/s00187-011-0127-6
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s00187-011-0127-6?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. Klayman, Joshua & Soll, Jack B. & Gonzalez-Vallejo, Claudia & Barlas, Sema, 1999. "Overconfidence: It Depends on How, What, and Whom You Ask, , , , , , , , ," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 79(3), pages 216-247, September.
    2. Brian W. Nocco & René M. Stulz, 2006. "Enterprise Risk Management: Theory and Practice," Journal of Applied Corporate Finance, Morgan Stanley, vol. 18(4), pages 8-20, September.
    3. Jeremy Berkowitz, 1999. "A coherent framework for stress-testing," Finance and Economics Discussion Series 1999-29, Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System (U.S.).
    4. Brenner, Lyle & Griffin, Dale & Koehler, Derek J., 2005. "Modeling patterns of probability calibration with random support theory: Diagnosing case-based judgment," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 97(1), pages 64-81, May.
    5. Herbert A. Simon, 1955. "A Behavioral Model of Rational Choice," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 69(1), pages 99-118.
    6. Thomas S. Wallsten & David V. Budescu, 1983. "State of the Art---Encoding Subjective Probabilities: A Psychological and Psychometric Review," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 29(2), pages 151-173, February.
    7. Brenner, Lyle A., 2003. "A random support model of the calibration of subjective probabilities," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 90(1), pages 87-110, January.
    8. Jack P.C. Kleijnen, 2015. "Design and Analysis of Simulation Experiments," International Series in Operations Research and Management Science, Springer, edition 2, number 978-3-319-18087-8, April.
    9. Carl S. Spetzler & Carl-Axel S. Staël Von Holstein, 1975. "Exceptional Paper--Probability Encoding in Decision Analysis," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 22(3), pages 340-358, November.
    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. Cathérine Grisar & Matthias Meyer, 2016. "Use of simulation in controlling research: a systematic literature review for German-speaking countries," Management Review Quarterly, Springer, vol. 66(2), pages 117-157, April.
    2. Jianping Li & Xiaoqian Zhu & Cheng-Few Lee & Dengsheng Wu & Jichuang Feng & Yong Shi, 2015. "On the aggregation of credit, market and operational risks," Review of Quantitative Finance and Accounting, Springer, vol. 44(1), pages 161-189, January.

    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. Brenner, Lyle & Griffin, Dale & Koehler, Derek J., 2005. "Modeling patterns of probability calibration with random support theory: Diagnosing case-based judgment," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 97(1), pages 64-81, May.
    2. Brenner, Lyle A., 2003. "A random support model of the calibration of subjective probabilities," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 90(1), pages 87-110, January.
    3. David Tannenbaum & Craig R. Fox & Gülden Ülkümen, 2017. "Judgment Extremity and Accuracy Under Epistemic vs. Aleatory Uncertainty," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 63(2), pages 497-518, February.
    4. Ali E. Abbas & David V. Budescu & Hsiu-Ting Yu & Ryan Haggerty, 2008. "A Comparison of Two Probability Encoding Methods: Fixed Probability vs. Fixed Variable Values," Decision Analysis, INFORMS, vol. 5(4), pages 190-202, December.
    5. Larrick, Richard P. & Burson, Katherine A. & Soll, Jack B., 2007. "Social comparison and confidence: When thinking you're better than average predicts overconfidence (and when it does not)," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 102(1), pages 76-94, January.
    6. David Tannenbaum & Craig R. Fox & Gülden Ülkümen, 2017. "Judgment Extremity and Accuracy Under Epistemic vs. Aleatory Uncertainty," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 63(2), pages 497-518, February.
    7. Daniel Fonseca Costa & Francisval Carvalho & Bruno César Moreira & José Willer Prado, 2017. "Bibliometric analysis on the association between behavioral finance and decision making with cognitive biases such as overconfidence, anchoring effect and confirmation bias," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 111(3), pages 1775-1799, June.
    8. Thomas W. Keelin & Bradford W. Powley, 2011. "Quantile-Parameterized Distributions," Decision Analysis, INFORMS, vol. 8(3), pages 206-219, September.
    9. Kausel, Edgar E. & Culbertson, Satoris S. & Madrid, Hector P., 2016. "Overconfidence in personnel selection: When and why unstructured interview information can hurt hiring decisions," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 137(C), pages 27-44.
    10. Kraft, Priscilla S. & Günther, Christina & Kammerlander, Nadine H. & Lampe, Jan, 2022. "Overconfidence and entrepreneurship: A meta-analysis of different types of overconfidence in the entrepreneurial process," Journal of Business Venturing, Elsevier, vol. 37(4).
    11. James S. Dyer & James E. Smith, 2021. "Innovations in the Science and Practice of Decision Analysis: The Role of Management Science," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 67(9), pages 5364-5378, September.
    12. Daniel J. Walters & Philip M. Fernbach & Craig R. Fox & Steven A. Sloman, 2017. "Known Unknowns: A Critical Determinant of Confidence and Calibration," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 63(12), pages 4298-4307, December.
    13. William F. Wright, 1988. "Comparaison empirique des méthodes d'inférence de probabilités subjectives," Contemporary Accounting Research, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 5(1), pages 58-69, September.
    14. López Martín, M.M. & García García, C.B. & García Pérez, J. & Sánchez Granero, M.A., 2012. "An alternative for robust estimation in Project Management," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 220(2), pages 443-451.
    15. Pirinsky, Christo, 2013. "Confidence and economic attitudes," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 91(C), pages 139-158.
    16. Sander Hoog, 2019. "Surrogate Modelling in (and of) Agent-Based Models: A Prospectus," Computational Economics, Springer;Society for Computational Economics, vol. 53(3), pages 1245-1263, March.
    17. Durbach, Ian N. & Stewart, Theodor J., 2011. "An experimental study of the effect of uncertainty representation on decision making," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 214(2), pages 380-392, October.
    18. Lau, Hon-Shiang & Somarajan, C., 1995. "A proposal on improved procedures for estimating task-time distributions in PERT," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 85(1), pages 39-52, August.
    19. James E. Smith & Detlof von Winterfeldt, 2004. "Anniversary Article: Decision Analysis in Management Science," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 50(5), pages 561-574, May.
    20. Christian Schumacher & Steffen Keck & Wenjie Tang, 2020. "Biased interpretation of performance feedback: The role of CEO overconfidence," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 41(6), pages 1139-1165, 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:spr:metrik:v:22:y:2011:i:1:p:79-105. 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: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    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.