IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/taf/nzecpp/v55y2021i3p263-276.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Gender differences in weighing probability and payoffs in risky prospects: experimental evidence from Malaysia

Author

Listed:
  • Ch’ng Kean-Siang
  • Suresh Narayanan
  • Tan Scaik Lin

Abstract

This paper examines gender differences in evaluating the probability and the outcome (payoff) of a risky prospect, when making a decision in both the gain and loss domains in Malaysia. Our study adds to the small but growing literature on experimental studies in a non-Western context. We found that in evaluating the probability of a risky project, females appear to be more risk averse than males in the lotteries for which both genders were risk averse but seem to be more risk-seeking than males in lotteries for which both genders were predominantly risk-seeking. This was the case in both the loss and gain domains. In evaluating the outcome of risky projects, our results suggest that although both genders exhibit diminishing sensitivity to outcome/payoff of lotteries in both the loss and gain domains, the curvature in both domains was not significantly different for both genders. These findings are consistent with studies elsewhere and do not indicate that cultural contexts influence gender reactions to risk.

Suggested Citation

  • Ch’ng Kean-Siang & Suresh Narayanan & Tan Scaik Lin, 2021. "Gender differences in weighing probability and payoffs in risky prospects: experimental evidence from Malaysia," New Zealand Economic Papers, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 55(3), pages 263-276, September.
  • Handle: RePEc:taf:nzecpp:v:55:y:2021:i:3:p:263-276
    DOI: 10.1080/00779954.2019.1684349
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1080/00779954.2019.1684349
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1080/00779954.2019.1684349?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.

    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:nzecpp:v:55:y:2021:i:3:p:263-276. 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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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: the person in charge (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.tandfonline.com/RNZP20 .

    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.