Risk Aversion in the Laboratory

By Glenn W. Harrison, E Elisabet Rutström. 2008

719 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Economics and Econometrics, General Decision Sciences, Safety Research

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/6cf60ec9ea9417014c769a7ab0e6e0006ba571e8

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Economics and Econometrics

In General Decision Sciences

In Safety Research

Citations in the corpus

Over)insuring Modest Risks (2010, background): “…that people are signi cantly averse to moderate risks, a point which some have questioned (Watt (2002), PalaciosHuerta et al.(2006)) There is extensive evidence that people do display risk aversion over small stakes in laboratory settings (e.g., Holt and Laury (2002), Harrison and Rutström (2008)).”
Measuring Individual Risk Attitudes in the Lab: Task or Ask? An Empirical Comparison (2015, positive): “Despite the empirical relevance of individual risk attitudes, however, there is still an ongoing debate as to their adequate elicitation (cf. Harrison and Rutström, 2008).”
A Theoretical and Experimental Appraisal of Five Risk Elicitation Methods (2013, positive): “…pairs as in Hey and Orme (1994), the Becker-DeGroot-Marschak mechanism, auctions, and the trade-off method as in (Wakker and Deneffe, 1996)), see Harrison and Rutström (2008), who underline pros and cons and provide different estimation techniques for the risk preference parameter(s) of…”
A Reconsideration of Gender Differences in Risk Attitudes (2016, neutral): “dure can be found in Harrison and Rutström (2008).”
Expected utility theory and prospect theory: one wedding and a decent funeral (2009, background): “Harrison and Rutström (2008) discuss these treatments, which have no effect on observed behavior.”
Risk Aversion: Experimental Evidence from South African Fishing Communities (2012, positive): “=P k=1,K(pkxUk), where expected utility is the utility of each lottery outcome weighted according to its probability (Harrison and Rutström 2008).”
Men, Women and Risk Aversion: Experimental Evidence (2008, positive): “In addition, this procedure has been criticized by Harrison (1992) and Harrison and Rutstrom (2008) because of distortions introduced by the low cost of making mistakes in valuing gambles, especially those with a low probability of paying off.”
Eliciting Risk and Time Preferences (2008, neutral): “Andersen, Harrison, Lau, and Rutström (2006) examined the properties of the MPL procedure in detail, and Harrison and Rutström (2008) reviewed alternative elicitation procedures for risk attitudes.”
Deciding under Doubt: A Theory of Risk Aversion, Time Discounting Preferences, and Educational Decision-making (2014, background): “The respondent is presented with a hypothetical (or real) lottery in which the prize sum and probability of winning are known (Harrison, Lau, and Rutström, 2007; Harrison and Rutström, 2008).”
Paradoxes and mechanisms for choice under risk (2014, positive): “analysis of risky decision data from experiments using POR yields a reported conclusion that the data are characterized by nonlinearity in both payoffs and probabilities (Harrison and Rutström, 2008).”
Variation in risk seeking behaviour following large losses: A natural experiment (2014, background): “A lack of incentives, for example, may lead to a hypothetical bias, one whose importance has clearly been established (Harrison and Rutström 2008, pp. 123–124).”