Financial Decision-Making: Are Women Really More Risk Averse?

Financial Decision-Making: Are Women Really More Risk Averse? treatment) allows us to validate the risk behavior induced by our experimental procedure in the light of the above-mentioned gambling evidence. In the context treatment, subjects were confronted with risky choices in two different decision contexts. Subjects first had to complete a series of investment decisions. They were then presented with a series of identical choices, this time, however, framed as insur- ance decisions. Each investment and insurance decision incorporated a choice between a risky lottery and a certain payoff. With the series of choices implemented in the two frames we elicited our subjects’ certainty equivalents for the same four risky lotteries (L1, L2, L3, L4) in both contexts.3 We implemented two frames in the context treatment in order to measure the risk propensity of subjects toward both perceived gains and perceived losses.4 In both frames, all possible payoffs for each decision were positive. In the investment frame these payoffs were also presented as gains, while in the insurance frame the same payoffs were presented as losses relative to an initial endowment. Therefore, elicited certainty equivalents in the investment frame measure subjects’ risk propensities in the gain domain, while certainty equivalents in the insurance frame measure risk propensity http://www.deepdyve.com/assets/images/DeepDyve-Logo-lg.png American Economic Review American Economic Association

Financial Decision-Making: Are Women Really More Risk Averse?

Loading next page...
 
/lp/american-economic-association/financial-decision-making-are-women-really-more-risk-averse-CIIjKRVweX
Publisher
American Economic Association
Copyright
Copyright © 1999 by the American Economic Association
Subject
Papers
ISSN
0002-8282
DOI
10.1257/aer.89.2.381
Publisher site
See Article on Publisher Site

Abstract

treatment) allows us to validate the risk behavior induced by our experimental procedure in the light of the above-mentioned gambling evidence. In the context treatment, subjects were confronted with risky choices in two different decision contexts. Subjects first had to complete a series of investment decisions. They were then presented with a series of identical choices, this time, however, framed as insur- ance decisions. Each investment and insurance decision incorporated a choice between a risky lottery and a certain payoff. With the series of choices implemented in the two frames we elicited our subjects’ certainty equivalents for the same four risky lotteries (L1, L2, L3, L4) in both contexts.3 We implemented two frames in the context treatment in order to measure the risk propensity of subjects toward both perceived gains and perceived losses.4 In both frames, all possible payoffs for each decision were positive. In the investment frame these payoffs were also presented as gains, while in the insurance frame the same payoffs were presented as losses relative to an initial endowment. Therefore, elicited certainty equivalents in the investment frame measure subjects’ risk propensities in the gain domain, while certainty equivalents in the insurance frame measure risk propensity

Journal

American Economic ReviewAmerican Economic Association

Published: May 1, 1999

There are no references for this article.

You’re reading a free preview. Subscribe to read the entire article.


DeepDyve is your
personal research library

It’s your single place to instantly
discover and read the research
that matters to you.

Enjoy affordable access to
over 18 million articles from more than
15,000 peer-reviewed journals.

All for just $49/month

Explore the DeepDyve Library

Search

Query the DeepDyve database, plus search all of PubMed and Google Scholar seamlessly

Organize

Save any article or search result from DeepDyve, PubMed, and Google Scholar... all in one place.

Access

Get unlimited, online access to over 18 million full-text articles from more than 15,000 scientific journals.

Your journals are on DeepDyve

Read from thousands of the leading scholarly journals from SpringerNature, Elsevier, Wiley-Blackwell, Oxford University Press and more.

All the latest content is available, no embargo periods.

See the journals in your area

DeepDyve

Freelancer

DeepDyve

Pro

Price

FREE

$49/month
$360/year

Save searches from
Google Scholar,
PubMed

Create folders to
organize your research

Export folders, citations

Read DeepDyve articles

Abstract access only

Unlimited access to over
18 million full-text articles

Print

20 pages / month

PDF Discount

20% off