IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/esi/discus/2006-34.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Valuing Protection against Low Probability, High Loss Risks: Experimental Evidence

Author

Listed:
  • Andrea Morone
  • Ozlem Ozdemir

Abstract

The study investigates protective responses in low probability and high loss risk situations. Particularly, it (1) detects individual protection valuations to variations in probability versus to variations in loss for payment decisions and choice decisions, (2) elicits the threshold probability in individuals’ minds that make them consider having protective measure, (3)calculates relative risk aversion. The results of the experiment indicate that as the probability of loss and loss amount increases, individuals tend to buy/pay more for protection. They are more responsive to the variation in probabilities than to the variation in loss amounts when they decide whether to buy the protective measure or not: choice decision. Yet, the opposite is true when they decide the amount of willingness to pay for buying the protective measure: payment decision. In addition, bid expected loss values have a bimodal distribution. Consistent with previous studies, individuals (particularly women) are found to be risk averse for low probabilities.

Suggested Citation

  • Andrea Morone & Ozlem Ozdemir, 2006. "Valuing Protection against Low Probability, High Loss Risks: Experimental Evidence," Papers on Strategic Interaction 2006-34, Max Planck Institute of Economics, Strategic Interaction Group.
    • Handle: RePEc:esi:discus:2006-34
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: ftp://papers.econ.mpg.de/esi/discussionpapers/2006-34.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Carmela Di Mauro & Anna Maffioletti, 2004. "Attitudes to risk and attitudes to uncertainty: experimental evidence," Applied Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 36(4), pages 357-372.
    2. Kunreuther, Howard & Novemsky, Nathan & Kahneman, Daniel, 2001. "Making Low Probabilities Useful," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 23(2), pages 103-120, September.
    3. Shogren, Jason F. & Crocker, Thomas D., 1999. "Risk and Its Consequences," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 37(1), pages 44-51, January.
    4. McClelland, Gary H & Schulze, William D & Coursey, Don L, 1993. "Insurance for Low-Probability Hazards: A Bimodal Response to Unlikely Events," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 7(1), pages 95-116, August.
    5. Tversky, Amos & Kahneman, Daniel, 1992. "Advances in Prospect Theory: Cumulative Representation of Uncertainty," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 5(4), pages 297-323, October.
    6. Dixit, Avinash K., 1990. "Optimization in Economic Theory," OUP Catalogue, Oxford University Press, edition 2, number 9780198772101.
    7. Philip J. Cook & Daniel A. Graham, 1977. "The Demand for Insurance and Protection: The Case of Irreplaceable Commodities," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 91(1), pages 143-156.
    8. Smith, V Kerry & Desvousges, William H, 1987. "An Empirical Analysis of the Economic Value of Risk Changes," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 95(1), pages 89-114, February.
    9. Viscusi, W Kip & Evans, William N, 1990. "Utility Functions That Depend on Health Status: Estimates and Economic Implications," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 80(3), pages 353-374, June.
    10. Steven R. Elliott, 1998. "Experiments in decision-making under risk and uncertainty: thinking outside the box," Managerial and Decision Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 19(4-5), pages 239-257.
    11. Ganderton, Philip T. & Brookshire, David S. & McKee, Michael & Stewart, Steve & Thurston, Hale, 2000. "Buying Insurance for Disaster-Type Risks: Experimental Evidence," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 20(3), pages 271-289, May.
    12. Brookshire, David S & Thayer. Mark A & Tschirhart, John & Schulze, William D, 1985. "A Test of the Expected Utility Model: Evidence from Earthquake Risks," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 93(2), pages 369-389, April.
    13. Shogren, Jason F, 1990. "The Impact of Self-protection and Self-insurance on Individual Response to Risk," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 3(2), pages 191-204, June.
    14. Howard Kunreuther & Mark Pauly, 2004. "Neglecting Disaster: Why Don't People Insure Against Large Losses?," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 28(1), pages 5-21, January.
    15. Nathalie Etchart-Vincent, 2004. "Is Probability Weighting Sensitive to the Magnitude of Consequences? An Experimental Investigation on Losses," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 28(3), pages 217-235, May.
    16. Dong, Weimin & Shah, Haresh & Wong, Felix, 1996. "A Rational Approach to Pricing of Catastrophe Insurance," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 12(2-3), pages 201-218, May.
    17. Machina, Mark J, 1982. ""Expected Utility" Analysis without the Independence Axiom," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 50(2), pages 277-323, March.
    18. Timothy L. McDaniels & Mark S. Kamlet & Gregory W. Fischer, 1992. "Risk Perception and the Value of Safety," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 12(4), pages 495-503, December.
    19. Greiner, Ben, 2004. "An Online Recruitment System for Economic Experiments," MPRA Paper 13513, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    20. Milton Friedman & L. J. Savage, 1948. "The Utility Analysis of Choices Involving Risk," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 56(4), pages 279-279.
    21. Colin F. Camerer & Howard Kunreuther, 1989. "Decision processes for low probability events: Policy implications," Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 8(4), pages 565-592.
    22. Gould, John P, 1969. "The Expected Utility Hypothesis and the Selection of Optimal Deductibles for a Given Insurance Policy," The Journal of Business, University of Chicago Press, vol. 42(2), pages 143-151, April.
    23. Kachelmeier, Steven J & Shehata, Mohamed, 1992. "Examining Risk Preferences under High Monetary Incentives: Experimental Evidence from the People's Republic of China," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 82(5), pages 1120-1141, December.
    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. Suryanto & Mudrajad Kuncoro & Junun Sartohadi, 2012. "Physical characteristics and disaster risk perception correlation at Bantul regency," Economic Journal of Emerging Markets, Universitas Islam Indonesia, vol. 4(1), pages 76-86, April.

    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. Morone, Andrea & Ozdemir, Ozlem, 2012. "Black swan protection: an experimental investigation," MPRA Paper 38842, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    2. Ozlem Ozdemir & Andrea Morone, 2014. "An experimental investigation of insurance decisions in low probability and high loss risk situations," Journal of Economic Interaction and Coordination, Springer;Society for Economic Science with Heterogeneous Interacting Agents, vol. 9(1), pages 53-67, April.
    3. Bradley T. Ewing & Jamie Brown Kruse & Dan Sutter, 2007. "Hurricanes and Economic Research: An Introduction to the Hurricane Katrina Symposium," Southern Economic Journal, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 74(2), pages 315-325, October.
    4. Bouchouicha, Ranoua & Martinsson, Peter & Medhin, Haileselassie & Vieider, Ferdinand M., 2017. "Stake effects on ambiguity attitudes for gains and losses," EconStor Open Access Articles and Book Chapters, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics, vol. 83(1), pages 19-35.
    5. Daniel Sutter & Marc Poitras, 2010. "Do people respond to low probability risks? Evidence from tornado risk and manufactured homes," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 40(2), pages 181-196, April.
    6. Andreas Friedl & Katharina Lima de Miranda & Ulrich Schmidt, 2014. "Insurance demand and social comparison: An experimental analysis," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 48(2), pages 97-109, April.
    7. Kumazawa Risa & Query J. Tim & Yanochik Mark A., 2011. "A Real-Options Approach to Post-Hurricane Loss Valuation of Damage Property: Rebuild or Repair?," Asia-Pacific Journal of Risk and Insurance, De Gruyter, vol. 5(1), pages 1-14, March.
    8. Vickie Bajtelsmit & Jennifer Coats & Paul Thistle, 2015. "The effect of ambiguity on risk management choices: An experimental study," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 50(3), pages 249-280, June.
    9. Botzen, W.J.W. & van den Bergh, J.C.J.M., 2012. "Risk attitudes to low-probability climate change risks: WTP for flood insurance," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 82(1), pages 151-166.
    10. Susan Laury & Melayne McInnes & J. Swarthout, 2009. "Insurance decisions for low-probability losses," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 39(1), pages 17-44, August.
    11. Akter, Sonia & Brouwer, Roy & Chowdhury, Saria & Aziz, Salina, 2008. "Determinants of Participation in a Catastrophe Insurance Programme: Empirical Evidence from a Developing Country," 2008 Conference (52nd), February 5-8, 2008, Canberra, Australia 5984, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society.
    12. Howard Kunreuther & Erwann Michel-Kerjan, 2015. "Demand for fixed-price multi-year contracts: Experimental evidence from insurance decisions," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 51(2), pages 171-194, October.
    13. Yan, Jubo & Kniffin, Kevin M. & Kunreuther, Howard C. & Schulze, William D., 2020. "The roles of reason and emotion in private and public responses to terrorism," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 180(C), pages 778-796.
    14. repec:cup:judgdm:v:13:y:2018:i:3:p:237-245 is not listed on IDEAS
    15. Mark Browne & Christian Knoller & Andreas Richter, 2015. "Behavioral bias and the demand for bicycle and flood insurance," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 50(2), pages 141-160, April.
    16. Osberghaus, Daniel & Reif, Christiane, 2021. "How do different compensation schemes and loss experience affect insurance decisions? Experimental evidence from two independent and heterogeneous samples," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 187(C).
    17. Matthew D. Rablen, 2023. "Loss Aversion, Risk Aversion, and the Shape of the Probability Weighting Function," Working Papers 2023013, The University of Sheffield, Department of Economics.
    18. Antoni Bosch-Domènech & Joaquim Silvestre, 2003. "Do the Wealthy Risk More Money? An Experimental Comparison," Discussion Papers 03-15, University of Copenhagen. Department of Economics.
    19. Etchart-Vincent, Nathalie, 2007. "Expérimentation de laboratoire et économie : contre quelques idées reçues et faux problèmes," L'Actualité Economique, Société Canadienne de Science Economique, vol. 83(1), pages 91-116, mars.
    20. Alexis DIRER, 2010. "Equilibrium Lottery Games and Preferences Under Risk," LEO Working Papers / DR LEO 550, Orleans Economics Laboratory / Laboratoire d'Economie d'Orleans (LEO), University of Orleans.
    21. Leblois, A. & Le Cotty, T. & Maître d'Hôtel, E., 2020. "How Might Climate Change Influence farmers' Demand for Index-Based Insurance?," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 176(C).

    More about this item

    Keywords

    experiments; risk; insurance;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • C91 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Design of Experiments - - - Laboratory, Individual Behavior
    • D81 - Microeconomics - - Information, Knowledge, and Uncertainty - - - Criteria for Decision-Making under Risk and Uncertainty

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    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:esi:discus:2006-34. 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: Karin Richter (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/mpiewde.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.