IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/taf/jriskr/v16y2013i7p791-802.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The effect of prior outcomes on gender risk-taking differences

Author

Listed:
  • Desmond Lam
  • Bernadete Ozorio

Abstract

This study proposed that men are more likely to take greater risk after a win ('house money' effect), while women are more likely to take greater risk after a loss ('escalation of commitment' effect). These effects are, however, moderated by prior experiences in risk-taking and role characteristics. Three distinct groups of 30 subjects (total = 90) each were solicited to play an experimental betting game. The subjects were categorized into risk providers (RP), risk customers (RC), and non-risk customers (NRC). RP are represented by casino executives, RC by leisure life-time casino gamblers, and NRC by non-casino gamblers. On average, RC group was found to take most betting risk. Male RCs were more likely to bet more after a win, while female RCs were more likely to bet more after a loss. NRCs, irrespective of gender, were more likely to bet more after a loss. There were no gender risk-taking differences in prior outcomes in the RP group.

Suggested Citation

  • Desmond Lam & Bernadete Ozorio, 2013. "The effect of prior outcomes on gender risk-taking differences," Journal of Risk Research, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 16(7), pages 791-802, August.
    • Handle: RePEc:taf:jriskr:v:16:y:2013:i:7:p:791-802
    DOI: 10.1080/13669877.2012.737824
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1080/13669877.2012.737824
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1080/13669877.2012.737824?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. He, Xin & Mittal, Vikas, 2007. "The effect of decision risk and project stage on escalation of commitment," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 103(2), pages 225-237, July.
    2. 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.
    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. Deaves, Richard & Kluger, Brian & Miele, Jennifer, 2018. "An exploratory experimental analysis of path-dependent investment behaviors," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 67(C), pages 47-65.
    2. Fenghua Wen & Zhifang He & Xu Gong & Aiming Liu, 2014. "Investors’ Risk Preference Characteristics Based on Different Reference Point," Discrete Dynamics in Nature and Society, Hindawi, vol. 2014, pages 1-9, April.
    3. F. T. T. Phua, 2017. "Does the built-environment industry attract risk-taking individuals?," Construction Management and Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 35(4), pages 207-217, April.
    4. Nite, Calvin & Hutchinson, Michael & Bouchet, Adrien, 2019. "Toward an institutional theory of escalation of commitment within sport management: A review and future directions," Sport Management Review, Elsevier, vol. 22(5), pages 571-583.
    5. Katarzyna Sekścińska & Joanna Rudzinska-Wojciechowska, 2021. "How Power Influences Decision-Makers’ Investment Behavior in the Domains of Loss and Gain," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(23), pages 1-13, December.
    6. Martens, Nikolai & Orzen, Henrik, 2021. "Escalating commitment to a failing course of action — A re-examination," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 137(C).

    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. Filiz-Ozbay, Emel & Guryan, Jonathan & Hyndman, Kyle & Kearney, Melissa & Ozbay, Erkut Y., 2015. "Do lottery payments induce savings behavior? Evidence from the lab," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 126(C), pages 1-24.
    2. Beatty, Timothy K.M. & Katare, Bhagyashree, 2018. "Low-cost approaches to increasing gym attendance," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 61(C), pages 63-76.
    3. Daniel Woods & Mustafa Abdallah & Saurabh Bagchi & Shreyas Sundaram & Timothy Cason, 2022. "Network defense and behavioral biases: an experimental study," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 25(1), pages 254-286, February.
    4. Iñigo Iturbe-Ormaetxe & Giovanni Ponti & Josefa Tomás, 2016. "Myopic Loss Aversion under Ambiguity and Gender Effects," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 11(12), pages 1-11, December.
    5. Adrian Bruhin & Helga Fehr-Duda & Thomas Epper, 2010. "Risk and Rationality: Uncovering Heterogeneity in Probability Distortion," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 78(4), pages 1375-1412, July.
    6. Andrew E. Clark & Conchita D’Ambrosio & Anthony Lepinteur, 2023. "Marriage as insurance: job protection and job insecurity in France," Review of Economics of the Household, Springer, vol. 21(4), pages 1157-1190, December.
    7. Rocco Caferra & Andrea Morone & Piergiuseppe Morone & Paolo Storelli, 2022. "Professional traders’ individual and social preferences under risk: Does group's wealth matter?," Annals of Public and Cooperative Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 93(4), pages 1063-1082, December.
    8. Syngjoo Choi & Jeongbin Kim & Eungik Lee & Jungmin Lee, 2022. "Probability Weighting and Cognitive Ability," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 68(7), pages 5201-5215, July.
    9. Narges Hajimoladarvish, 2017. "Very Low Probabilities in the Loss Domain," The Geneva Papers on Risk and Insurance Theory, Springer;International Association for the Study of Insurance Economics (The Geneva Association), vol. 42(1), pages 41-58, March.
    10. Campos-Vazquez, Raymundo M. & Cuilty, Emilio, 2014. "The role of emotions on risk aversion: A Prospect Theory experiment," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 50(C), pages 1-9.
    11. Kontek, Krzysztof, 2011. "What is the actual shape of perception utility?," MPRA Paper 31715, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    12. Zahra Murad & Martin Sefton & Chris Starmer, 2016. "How do risk attitudes affect measured confidence?," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 52(1), pages 21-46, February.
    13. 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).
    14. Sungchang Kang & Jeongseok Bang & Doojin Ryu, 2024. "Female CEOs’ risk management and earnings performance during the financial crisis," Asian Business & Management, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 23(1), pages 110-138, February.
    15. Schade, Christian & Schroeder, Andreas & Krause, Kai Oliver, 2010. "Coordination after gains and losses: Is prospect theory’s value function predictive for games?," Structural Change in Agriculture/Strukturwandel im Agrarsektor (SiAg) Working Papers 59524, Humboldt University Berlin, Department of Agricultural Economics.
    16. Booth, Alison & Nolen, Patrick, 2012. "Salience, risky choices and gender," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 117(2), pages 517-520.
    17. Kiss, Hubert J. & Rodriguez-Lara, Ismael & Rosa-Garcia, Alfonso, 2014. "Do women panic more than men? An experimental study of financial decisions," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 52(C), pages 40-51.
    18. Golmohammadi, Alireza & Mattila, Anna S. & Gauri, Dinesh K., 2020. "Negative online reviews and consumers’ service consumption," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 116(C), pages 27-36.
    19. F. J. Callado-Munoz & J. Gonzalez-Chapela & N. Utrero-Gonzalez, 2017. "Analysis of Variance in Household Financial Portfolio Choice: Evidence from Spain," Czech Journal of Economics and Finance (Finance a uver), Charles University Prague, Faculty of Social Sciences, vol. 67(5), pages 439-459, October.
    20. Julie A. Nelson, 2015. "Are Women Really More Risk-Averse Than Men? A Re-Analysis Of The Literature Using Expanded Methods," Journal of Economic Surveys, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 29(3), pages 566-585, July.

    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:taf:jriskr:v:16:y:2013:i:7:p:791-802. 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 Longhurst (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.tandfonline.com/RJRR20 .

    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.