IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ehl/lserod/2235.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Perceptions of risk : an experimental approach using internet questionnaires

Author

Listed:
  • Cowell, Frank
  • Cruces, Guillermo

Abstract

Building on previous studies on perceptions of inequality, welfare and risk we investigate the structure of individuals' rankings of uncertain prospects in terms of risk and their relationship to individual preferences. We examine three interlinked propositions that are fundamental to the standard economic approach to risk: (i) that rankings by risk are simply the reverse of ranking by preference over distributions with a given mean; (ii) that risk-rankings respect the principle of mean-preserving spreads; (iii) that risk-rankings are independent of whether the individual is personally involved in the gains/losses associated with the uncertain prospects. To do this we use a set of questionnaires implemented through the Virtual Laboratory, a novel experimental setting for the study of normative issues in experimental economics. The results from the questionnaires provide an evaluation of the similitude between individual perceptions of risk and theoretical axioms. They also help identify the individual characteristics that might affect such perceptions.

Suggested Citation

  • Cowell, Frank & Cruces, Guillermo, 2003. "Perceptions of risk : an experimental approach using internet questionnaires," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 2235, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
  • Handle: RePEc:ehl:lserod:2235
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://eprints.lse.ac.uk/2235/
    File Function: Open access version.
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Amiel, Yoram & Cowell, Frank, 2001. "Risk and inequality perceptions," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 2058, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    2. Amiel,Yoram & Cowell,Frank, 1999. "Thinking about Inequality," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521466967.
    3. Rothschild, Michael & Stiglitz, Joseph E., 1973. "Some further results on the measurement of inequality," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 6(2), pages 188-204, April.
    4. John C. Harsanyi, 1953. "Cardinal Utility in Welfare Economics and in the Theory of Risk-taking," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 61(5), pages 434-434.
    5. Amiel, Yoram & Cowell, Frank, 2000. "Attitudes towards risk and inequality : a questionnaire-experimental approach," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 2105, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    6. Daniel Kahneman & Amos Tversky, 2013. "Prospect Theory: An Analysis of Decision Under Risk," World Scientific Book Chapters, in: Leonard C MacLean & William T Ziemba (ed.), HANDBOOK OF THE FUNDAMENTALS OF FINANCIAL DECISION MAKING Part I, chapter 6, pages 99-127, World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd..
    7. John C. Harsanyi, 1955. "Cardinal Welfare, Individualistic Ethics, and Interpersonal Comparisons of Utility," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 63(4), pages 309-309.
    8. Gaertner, Wulf & Jungeilges, Jochen, 1999. "Evaluation via extended orderings: empirical findings from west and east," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 6583, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    9. Rothschild, Michael & Stiglitz, Joseph E., 1970. "Increasing risk: I. A definition," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 2(3), pages 225-243, September.
    10. Rothschild, Michael & Stiglitz, Joseph E., 1971. "Increasing risk II: Its economic consequences," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 3(1), pages 66-84, March.
    11. Atkinson, Anthony B., 1970. "On the measurement of inequality," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 2(3), pages 244-263, September.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Yoram Amiel & Frank Cowell & Liema Davidovitz & Avraham Polovin, 2008. "Preference reversals and the analysis of income distributions," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 30(2), pages 305-330, February.
    2. Seidl, Christian & Camacho Cuena, Eva & Morone, Andrea, 2003. "Income Distributions versus Lotteries Happiness, Response-Mode Effects, and Preference," Economics Working Papers 2003-01, Christian-Albrechts-University of Kiel, Department of Economics.
    3. Camacho-Cuena, Eva & Seidl, Christian & Morone, Andrea, 2005. "Comparing preference reversal for general lotteries and income distributions," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 26(5), pages 682-710, October.
    4. Yoram Amiel & Frank Cowell & Wulf Gaertner, 2012. "Distributional orderings: an approach with seven flavors," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 73(3), pages 381-399, September.
    5. Amiel, Yoram & Cowell, Frank, 2001. "Risk and inequality perceptions," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 2058, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    6. Michele Bernasconi, 2002. "How should income be divided? questionnaire evidence from the theory of “Impartial preferences”," Journal of Economics, Springer, vol. 77(1), pages 163-195, December.
    7. Che-Yuan Liang, 2017. "Optimal inequality behind the veil of ignorance," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 83(3), pages 431-455, October.
    8. Gajdos, Thibault & Weymark, John A., 2012. "Introduction to inequality and risk," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 147(4), pages 1313-1330.
    9. Michele Bernasconi, 2002. "How should income be divided? questionnaire evidence from the theory of “Impartial preferences”," Journal of Economics, Springer, vol. 9(1), pages 163-195, December.
    10. Piacquadio, Paolo G., 2020. "The ethics of intergenerational risk," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 186(C).
    11. Stefan Traub & Christian Seidl & Ulrich Schmidt & Maria Levati, 2005. "Friedman, Harsanyi, Rawls, Boulding – or somebody else? An experimental investigation of distributive justice," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 24(2), pages 283-309, April.
    12. Yoram Amiel & Frank Cowell & Wulf Gaertner, 2009. "To be or not to be involved: a questionnaire-experimental view on Harsanyi’s utilitarian ethics," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 32(2), pages 299-316, February.
    13. Walter Bossert & Conchita D'Ambrosio, 2013. "Measuring Economic Insecurity," International Economic Review, Department of Economics, University of Pennsylvania and Osaka University Institute of Social and Economic Research Association, vol. 54(3), pages 1017-1030, August.
    14. Moti Michaeli, 2021. "On Measuring Welfare ‘Behind a Veil of Ignorance’," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 56(1), pages 57-66, January.
    15. Gundersen, Craig & et al. [+9], 2000. "A Safety Net For Farm Households," Agricultural Economic Reports 308435, United States Department of Agriculture, Economic Research Service.
    16. Breitmeyer, Carsten & Hakenes, Hendrik & Pfingsten, Andreas, 2004. "From poverty measurement to the measurement of downside risk," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 47(3), pages 327-348, May.
    17. Marcelo Bérgolo & Gabriel Burdín & Santiago Burone & Mauricio de Rosa & Matías Giaccobasso & Martín Leites, 2020. "Dissecting Inequality-Averse Preferences," Documentos de Trabajo (working papers) 20-19, Instituto de Economía - IECON.
    18. Traub, Stefan & Seidl, Christian & Schmidt, Ulrich & Levati, Maria Vittoria, 2003. "Friedman, Harsanyi, Rawls, Boulding - or Somebody Else?," Economics Working Papers 2003-03, Christian-Albrechts-University of Kiel, Department of Economics.
    19. Cowell, Frank A. & Schokkaert, Erik, 2001. "Risk perceptions and distributional judgments," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 45(4-6), pages 941-952, May.
    20. Traub, Stefan & Seidl, Christian & Schmidt, Ulrich, 2009. "An experimental study on individual choice, social welfare, and social preferences," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 53(4), pages 385-400, May.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Inequality; risk; experiment; transfer principle; mean-preserving spread;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • C13 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Econometric and Statistical Methods and Methodology: General - - - Estimation: General
    • D63 - Microeconomics - - Welfare Economics - - - Equity, Justice, Inequality, and Other Normative Criteria and Measurement

    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:ehl:lserod:2235. 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: LSERO Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/lsepsuk.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.