1 / 12

Is There a Life After Holt and Laury (2002)?

Is There a Life After Holt and Laury (2002)?. Ganna Pogrebna G.Pogrebna@warwick.ac.uk www.gannapogrebna.com March 11, 2010. G v P. Holt and Laury (2002) Procedure. G v P. Popularity of Holt and Laury (2002). Google Scholar: Holt and Laury (2002): 6,350 citations

lovie
Download Presentation

Is There a Life After Holt and Laury (2002)?

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Is There a Life After Holt and Laury (2002)? Ganna Pogrebna G.Pogrebna@warwick.ac.uk www.gannapogrebna.com March 11, 2010 GvP

  2. Holt and Laury (2002) Procedure GvP

  3. Popularity of Holt and Laury (2002) • Google Scholar: • Holt and Laury (2002): 6,350 citations • Eckel and Grossman (2002): 411 citations • DoSpeRT Scale by Weber et al. (2002): 54 citations • JSTOR: • Holt and Laury (2002): 65 citations • Eckel and Grossman (2002): 29 citations • DoSpeRT Scale by Weber et al. (2002): 6 citations GvP

  4. Virtues and Vices • Virtues: • please the referees • cheap and easy to implement • “relative” flavor • Vices: • not much heterogeneity in the data (majority of participants “slightly risk averse”/ “risk averse”) • inconsistent participants cannot be classified • may produce results that are not robust • assumes CRRA utility function GvP

  5. One Empirical Observation Self-Reported Measure (SR) Holt and Laury Measure (HL) GvP

  6. One Empirical Observation (continued) • Innsbruck, Austria (2006-2007) 161 participants p=0.000 p=0.041 GvP

  7. Controlling for Gender • Innsbruck, Austria (2006-2007) 161 participants MEN WOMEN

  8. One Empirical Observation (continued) • Berlin, Germany (2008) 184 participants p=0.000 p=0.470 GvP

  9. Controlling for Gender • Berlin, Germany (2008) 184 participants MEN WOMEN

  10. One Empirical Observation (continued) • New York, USA (2007-2009) 562 participants p=0.000 p=0.000 GvP

  11. Controlling for Gender • New York, USA (2007-2009) 562 participants MEN WOMEN

  12. Possible Explanations and Questions • Incentives • “Risk” overconfidence • People do not have CRRA utility function Which measure provides a “correct” representation of individual risk attitude? Which measure has an impact on behavior: HL or SR? GvP

More Related