An Endowment Effect for Risk: Experimental Tests of Stochastic Reference Points
In: Journal of political economy, Band 123, Heft 6, S. 1456-1499
ISSN: 1537-534X
23 Ergebnisse
Sortierung:
In: Journal of political economy, Band 123, Heft 6, S. 1456-1499
ISSN: 1537-534X
In: American economic review, Band 105, Heft 5, S. 280-285
ISSN: 1944-7981
This article briefly summarizes and judges recent experimental developments exploring the predictions of dynamically inconsistent models. An opinion is provided as to how the literature may evolve given these recent advances.
In: American economic review, Band 105, Heft 7, S. 2287-2293
ISSN: 1944-7981
Can the well-known experimental phenomenon of present-bias in intertemporal choice be confounded with the risks associated with receiving payment? Can measurements of risk preferences be used to represent desires for smoothness in intertemporal payments? In our two 2012 papers in this journal we explored these two questions and found the answer to the first to be yes and the second to be no. We feel the three papers inspired by our work and published here underscore these arguments and point to interesting new possibilities for modeling and measuring risk over time. (JEL C91, D81, D91)
In: American economic review, Band 102, Heft 7, S. 3357-3376
ISSN: 1944-7981
Risk and time are intertwined. The present is known while the future is inherently risky. This is problematic when studying time preferences since uncontrolled risk can generate apparently present-biased behavior. We systematically manipulate risk in an intertemporal choice experiment. Discounted expected utility performs well with risk, but when certainty is added common ratio predictions fail sharply. The data cannot be explained by prospect theory, hyperbolic discounting, or preferences for resolution of uncertainty, but seem consistent with a direct preference for certainty. The data suggest strongly a difference between risk and time preferences. (JEL C91 D81 D91)
In: American economic review, Band 102, Heft 7, S. 3333-3356
ISSN: 1944-7981
Experimentally elicited discount rates are frequently higher than what seems reasonable for economic decision-making. Such high rates are often attributed to present-biased discounting. A well-known bias of standard measurements is the assumption of linear consumption utility. Attempting to correct this bias using measures of risk aversion to identify concavity, researchers find reasonable discounting but at the cost of exceptionally high utility function curvature. We present a new methodology for identifying time preferences, both discounting and curvature, from simple allocation decisions. We find reasonable levels of both discounting and curvature and, surprisingly, dynamically consistent time preferences. (JEL C91, D12, D81)
In: Networks Financial Institute: Working Paper Series: 2012-WP-06
SSRN
Working paper
In: NBER Working Paper No. w17342
SSRN
In: NBER Working Paper No. w16348
SSRN
In: NBER Working Paper No. w16347
SSRN
SSRN
SSRN
In: IZA Discussion Paper No. 4198
SSRN
In: Econometrica, Forthcoming
SSRN
Many policy makers and economists argue that financial literacy is key to financial well-being. But why do many individuals remain financially illiterate despite the apparent importance of being financially informed? This paper presents results of a field study linking individual decisions to acquire personal financial information to a critical, and normally unobservable, characteristic: time preferences. We offered a short, free credit counseling and information program to more than 870 individuals. About 55 percent chose to participate. Independently, we elicited time preferences using incentivized choice experiments both for individuals who selected into the program and those who did not. Our results show that the two groups differ sharply in their measured discount factors. Individuals who choose to acquire personal financial information through the credit counseling program discount the future less than individuals who choose not to participate. Our results suggest that individual time preference may explain who will and who will not choose to become financially literate. This has implications for the validity of studies evaluating voluntary financial education programs and policy efforts focused on expanding financial education.
BASE
In: NBER Working Paper No. w24075
SSRN