How Real is Hypothetical? A High-Stakes Test of the Allais Paradox

Researchers in behavioral and experimental economics often argue that only incentive-compatible mechanisms can elicit effort and truthful responses from participants. Others argue that participants make less-biased decisions when the stakes are sufficiently high. Are these claims correct? We investigate the change in behavior as incentives are scaled up in the Allais paradox, and document an increase , not decrease, in deviations from expected utility with higher stakes. We also find that if one needs to approximate participants’ behavior in real high-stakes Allais (which are often too expensive to conduct), it is better to use hypothetically high stakes than real low stakes, as is typically the practice today.