Loss Averse Behavior

By Peter Brooks, Horst Zank. 2005

180 citations recorded by the source corpus.

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

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/df1b6d98e2f19f5354bb480de1ffd947233ba935

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

Risk Preferences Around the World (2015, background): “…et al. (2006) find no gender difference in utility curvature in gains and losses, suggesting that the observed differences in risk attitudes may be driven by loss aversion (Booij and van de Kuilen 2009, Brooks and Zank 2005, Schmidt and Traub 2002) or probability weighting (Fehr-Duda et al. 2006).”
Executive stock options, gender diversity in the top management team, and firm risk taking (2015, background): “…packages (Munoz-Bullon, 2010; Vieito & Khan, 2012), there is a widespread view that women are bothmore risk averse and loss averse than men (Brooks & Zank, 2005; Charness & Gneezy, 2012; Croson & Gneezy, 2009), and thus the ESO effect on firm risk taking may change with different levels of…”
The “bomb” risk elicitation task (2013, unknown): “12Evidence along this line is also provided by Brooks and Zank (2005); Schmidt and Traub (2002) who find a relatively larger number of women being classified as loss averse in experimental tasks with multiple individual choices involving mixed gambles.”
The ostrich effect: Selective attention to information (2009, background): “Risk aversion and prospect theory both suggest that negative departures from a reference point have a greater negative impact on utility than the positive impact of positive departures (Kahneman and Tversky 1982; Brooks and Zank 2005).”
Trust: An Integrative Review from a Person–Situation Perspective (2015, background): “…Terracciano, & McCrae, 2001; Feingold, 1994)—and the correspondingly elevated levels of risk aversion (Eckel & Grossman, 2008), loss aversion (e.g., Brooks & Zank, 2005; Rau, 2014; Schmidt & Traub, 2002), and Emotionality (Moshagen, Hilbig, & Zettler, 2014)—imply that women would show a reduced…”
Digit ratios (2D:4D) as predictors of risky decision making for both sexes (2011, background): “3 Brooks and Zank (2005) also find that women are more loss averse than men in a laboratory experiment. Moreover, both Daruvala (2007) and Ball, Eckel, and Heracleous (2010) report that subjects, both men and women, predict that women will make more risk averse choices than men, suggesting that the ”
A parameter-free analysis of the utility of money for the general population under prospect theory (2009, result): “The finding that females and lower educated respondents are significantly more loss averse than males is in agreement with findings in the laboratory (Brooks & Zank, 2005; Schmidt & Traub, 2002).”