Assessing the Construct Validity of Risk Attitude

By Joost M. E. Pennings, Ale Smidts. 2000

309 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: General Decision Sciences, Soil Science, Tourism, Leisure and Hospitality Management

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/c3c6b313437ea8f5dff89b8a13531c981f81986f

How researchers see this paper

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

In General Decision Sciences

In Soil Science

In Tourism, Leisure and Hospitality Management

Citations in the corpus

The myth of the risk-tolerant entrepreneur (2004, background): “Risk attitude measures, which are based on an expected utility model derived from responses to lotteries, have been shown to be better predictors of actual risk behavior (Pennings and Smidts, 2000).”
Individual Investor Perceptions and Behavior During the Financial Crisis (2013, unknown): “Risk tolerance reflects a respondent’s predisposition toward financial risk (like or dislike of risky situations) and is measured as in Pennings and Smidts (2000). Risk perception reflects a respondent’s interpretation of the riskiness of the stock market and is measured according to Pennings and Wa”
Understanding Producers’ Motives for Adopting Sustainable Practices: The Role of Expected Rewards, Risk Perception, and Risk Tolerance (2016, methodology): “Then we use the output of the CFA (factor scores), which captures the latent constructs, as explanatory variables for the adoption of sustainable practices, employing logistic regression.”
The dual role of price: decomposing consumers’ reactions to price (2008, result): “with findings in other studies that attempt to explain observed behavior on the basis of self-reported measures (e.g., De Wulf et al. 2003; Pennings and Smidts 2000 ).”
A note on modeling consumer reactions to a crisis: The case of the mad cow disease (2002, unknown): “This interaction reflects that risk averse decision-makers will engage in behavior that reduces risk, and that this becomes more prominent as the decision-maker perceives more risk (e.g., Pennings & Smidts, 2000).”
Consumer Food Safety Risk Perceptions and Attitudes: Impacts on Beef Consumption across Countries (2007, methodology): “To develop risk attitude and risk perception constructs in a reliable and valid manner, we adhered to the iterative procedure recommended by Churchill (1979) and Pennings and Smidts (2000).”
Public Preferences and Private Choices: Effect of Altruism and Free Riding on Demand for Environmentally Certified Pork (2007, background): “sure economic constructs such as risk aversion ( Pennings and Smidts 2000; Pennings and Garcia 2001), risk perceptions (Pennings et al. 2002), and industry structure (Pecotich et al. 1999).”
Hedging Behavior in Small and Medium-Sized Enterprises: The Role of Unobserved Heterogeneity (2004, unknown): “Furthermore, managers of SMEs may have different risk attitudes and risk perceptions, suggesting that these firms may behave differently (e.g., Pennings and Smidts, 2000).”
Risk Attitude and Market Behavior: Evidence from Experimental Asset Markets (2007, unknown): “Comparing the risk attitude measures based on expected utility theory and on psychometric approaches, Pennings and Smidts (2000) find that there is some degree of convergence, however risk attitude as inferred from lotteries is superior in predicting market behavior.”
Determinants of risk behaviour: effects of perceived risks and risk attitude on farmer’s adoption of risk management strategies (2016, background): “Within this tradition, risk attitudes are often assumed to differ over domains and even time, i.e. decisionmakers can be simultaneously risk seeking and risk averse in different domains (Hansson and Lagerkvist 2012; Pennings and Smidts 2000; Starks and Trinidad 2007).”
Common components of risk and uncertainty attitudes across contexts and domains: evidence from 30 countries (2015, background): “Pennings & Smidts (2000) showed that real world risk averse strategies by Dutch hog farmers is predicted by lottery measures, but not by survey measures (the latter, however, perform better at predicting attitude measurements).”