Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: https://hdl.handle.net/10419/207084 
Year of Publication: 
2019
Series/Report no.: 
Working Papers in Economics and Statistics No. 2019-19
Publisher: 
University of Innsbruck, Research Platform Empirical and Experimental Economics (eeecon), Innsbruck
Abstract: 
With the rise of experimental research in the social sciences, numerous methods to elicit and classify people's risk attitudes in the laboratory have evolved. However, evidence suggests that people's attitudes towards risk may change considerably when measured with different methods. Based on a with-subject experimental design using four widespread risk preference elicitation methods, we find that different procedures indeed give rise to considerably varying estimates of individual and aggregate level risk preferences. Conducting simulation exercises to obtain benchmarks for subjects' behavior, we find that the observed heterogeneity in risk preference estimates across methods looks qualitatively similar to the heterogeneity arising from independent random draws from choices in the experimental tasks, despite significantly positive correlations between tasks. Our study, however, provides evidence that subjects are surprisingly well aware of the variation in the riskiness of their choices. We argue that this calls into question the common interpretation of variation in revealed risk preferences as being inconsistent.
Subjects: 
Risk preference elicitation
inconsistent behavior
risk attitudes
JEL: 
C91
D81
Document Type: 
Working Paper

Files in This Item:
File
Size





Items in EconStor are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.