IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/h/pkk/meb017/195-204.html
   My bibliography  Save this book chapter

How would You Decide on behalf of Your Friend?

Author

Listed:
  • Anita Kolnhofer-Derecskei

    (Óbuda University)

Abstract

Several prominent economists have underlined that actors are often concerned about the well-being (or feelings) of others. It seems ‘homo oeconimicus’ is selfish/rational and acts like a Good Samaritan at the same time. But being a Good Samaritan and deciding about somebody else’s property is not a big deal. The aim of this study is to observe endowment heterogeneity in the case of a risky financial decision. Ownership and endowment effects were measured through using within-subjects design, i.e. two gambling situations were offered to subjects. Firstly, they should assess risks and allocate their own property. Secondly, they had to decide on behalf of one of their friends. This paper does not provide a theoretical summing up, but focuses on empirical findings. Using game experiment it was found that ownership plays a role in explaining the outcome of a risky financial situation.

Suggested Citation

  • Anita Kolnhofer-Derecskei, 2017. "How would You Decide on behalf of Your Friend?," Proceedings- 11th International Conference on Mangement, Enterprise and Benchmarking (MEB 2017),, Óbuda University, Keleti Faculty of Business and Management.
  • Handle: RePEc:pkk:meb017:195-204
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://kgk.uni-obuda.hu/sites/default/files/16_Kolnofer-Derecskei.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. repec:cup:judgdm:v:2:y:2007:i::p:107-114 is not listed on IDEAS
    2. Thaler, Richard, 1980. "Toward a positive theory of consumer choice," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 1(1), pages 39-60, 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. Kolnhofer-Derecskei Anita, 2017. "The Indifferent, the Good Samaritan, the Brave and the Agent in Allais Paradox situation – or How Endowment Effect Influences Our Decision in Case of Allais Paradox?," Organizacija, Sciendo, vol. 50(4), pages 299-313, December.
    2. Nagy Viktor, 2018. "Evaluation of Decision Effectiveness Over Time," Economics and Culture, Sciendo, vol. 15(2), pages 34-42, December.

    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. Ellingsen, Tore & Johannesson, Magnus, 2009. "Time is not money," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 72(1), pages 96-102, October.
    2. Boehne, Donna M. & Paese, Paul W., 2000. "Deciding Whether to Complete or Terminate an Unfinished Project: A Strong Test of the Project Completion Hypothesis," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 81(2), pages 178-194, March.
    3. Park, JungKun & Ahn, Jiseon & Thavisay, Toulany & Ren, Tianbao, 2019. "Examining the role of anxiety and social influence in multi-benefits of mobile payment service," Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, Elsevier, vol. 47(C), pages 140-149.
    4. Thomas Fischer, 2012. "Inequality and Financial Markets - A Simulation Approach in a Heterogeneous Agent Model," Lecture Notes in Economics and Mathematical Systems, in: Andrea Teglio & Simone Alfarano & Eva Camacho-Cuena & Miguel Ginés-Vilar (ed.), Managing Market Complexity, edition 127, chapter 0, pages 79-90, Springer.
    5. Aloysius, John A., 2003. "Rational escalation of costs by playing a sequence of unfavorable gambles: the martingale," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 51(1), pages 111-129, May.
    6. Carstensen, Laura L. & Reynolds, Megan E., 2023. "Age differences in preferences through the lens of socioemotional selectivity theory," The Journal of the Economics of Ageing, Elsevier, vol. 24(C).
    7. Nicola Gennaioli & Alberto Martin & Stefano Rossi, 2014. "Sovereign Default, Domestic Banks, and Financial Institutions," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 69(2), pages 819-866, April.
    8. Brockner, Joel & Higgins, E. Tory, 2001. "Regulatory Focus Theory: Implications for the Study of Emotions at Work," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 86(1), pages 35-66, September.
    9. List, John A. & Samek, Anya Savikhin, 2015. "The behavioralist as nutritionist: Leveraging behavioral economics to improve child food choice and consumption," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 39(C), pages 135-146.
    10. Mercè Roca & Robin Hogarth & A. Maule, 2006. "Ambiguity seeking as a result of the status quo bias," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 32(3), pages 175-194, May.
    11. Earl, Peter E., 2012. "Experiential analysis of automotive consumption," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 65(7), pages 1067-1072.
    12. Andreas Hefti & Peiyao Shen & King King Li, 2021. "Igniting deliberation in high stake decisions: a field study," ECON - Working Papers 378, Department of Economics - University of Zurich.
    13. Florian Englmaier & Arno Schmöller, 2008. "Reserve Price Formation in Online Auctions," CESifo Working Paper Series 2374, CESifo.
    14. Robert W. Hahn & Robert N. Stavins, 2011. "The Effect of Allowance Allocations on Cap-and-Trade System Performance," Journal of Law and Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 54(S4), pages 267-294.
    15. Bietenbeck, Jan & Leibing, Andreas & Marcus, Jan & Weinhardt, Felix, 2023. "Tuition fees and educational attainment," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 154(C).
    16. Saito, Hiroharu, 2022. "Loss aversion for the value of voting rights: WTA/WTP ratios for a ballot," International Review of Law and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 69(C).
    17. Sharma, Dheeraj & Pandey, Shivendra, 2020. "The role payment depreciation in short temporal separations: Should online retailer make customers wait?," Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, Elsevier, vol. 53(C).
    18. Gino, Francesca, 2008. "Do we listen to advice just because we paid for it? The impact of advice cost on its use," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 107(2), pages 234-245, November.
    19. Lin, Chaonan & Chen, Hong-Yi & Ko, Kuan-Cheng & Yang, Nien-Tzu, 2021. "Time-dependent lottery preference and the cross-section of stock returns," Journal of Empirical Finance, Elsevier, vol. 64(C), pages 272-294.
    20. Salandro, Daniel & Peterson, Steven, 1996. "An examination of the issue of form versus substance in an experimental asset market: A pilot study," International Review of Financial Analysis, Elsevier, vol. 5(1), pages 1-18.

    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:pkk:meb017:195-204. 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: Alexandra Vécsey (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/gkbmfhu.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.