个体风险态度:来自大型、代表性、实验验证调查的新证据

Thomas Dohmen, A. Falk, David Huffman, J. Schupp, U. Sunde, G. Wagner
{"title":"个体风险态度:来自大型、代表性、实验验证调查的新证据","authors":"Thomas Dohmen, A. Falk, David Huffman, J. Schupp, U. Sunde, G. Wagner","doi":"10.2139/ssrn.807408","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This paper presents new evidence on the distribution of risk attitudes in the population, using a novel set of survey questions and a representative sample of roughly 22,000 individuals living in Germany. Using a question that asks about willingness to take risks in general, on an 11-point scale, we find evidence of heterogeneity across individuals, and show that willingness to take risks is negatively related to age and being female, and positively related to height and parental education. We test the behavioral relevance of this survey measure by conducting a complementary field experiment, based on a representative sample of 450 subjects, and find that the general risk question is a good predictor of actual risk-taking behavior. We then use a more standard lottery question to measure risk preferences in our sample of 22,000, and find similar results regarding heterogeneity and determinants of risk preferences, compared to the general risk question. The lottery question also makes it possible to estimate the coefficient of relative risk aversion for each individual in the sample. Using five questions about willingness to take risks in specific domains - car driving, financial matters, sports and leisure, career, and health - the paper also studies the impact of context on risk attitudes, finding a strong but imperfect correlation across contexts. Using data on a collection of risky behaviors from different contexts, including traffic offences, portfolio choice, smoking, occupational choice, participation in sports, and migration, the paper compares the predictive power of all of the risk measures. Strikingly, the general risk question predicts all behaviors whereas the standard lottery measure does not. The best predictor for any specific behavior is typically the corresponding context-specific measure.","PeriodicalId":105371,"journal":{"name":"Public Health Law & Policy","volume":"12 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2005-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"856","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Individual Risk Attitudes: New Evidence from a Large, Representative, Experimentally-Validated Survey\",\"authors\":\"Thomas Dohmen, A. Falk, David Huffman, J. Schupp, U. Sunde, G. Wagner\",\"doi\":\"10.2139/ssrn.807408\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"This paper presents new evidence on the distribution of risk attitudes in the population, using a novel set of survey questions and a representative sample of roughly 22,000 individuals living in Germany. Using a question that asks about willingness to take risks in general, on an 11-point scale, we find evidence of heterogeneity across individuals, and show that willingness to take risks is negatively related to age and being female, and positively related to height and parental education. We test the behavioral relevance of this survey measure by conducting a complementary field experiment, based on a representative sample of 450 subjects, and find that the general risk question is a good predictor of actual risk-taking behavior. We then use a more standard lottery question to measure risk preferences in our sample of 22,000, and find similar results regarding heterogeneity and determinants of risk preferences, compared to the general risk question. The lottery question also makes it possible to estimate the coefficient of relative risk aversion for each individual in the sample. Using five questions about willingness to take risks in specific domains - car driving, financial matters, sports and leisure, career, and health - the paper also studies the impact of context on risk attitudes, finding a strong but imperfect correlation across contexts. Using data on a collection of risky behaviors from different contexts, including traffic offences, portfolio choice, smoking, occupational choice, participation in sports, and migration, the paper compares the predictive power of all of the risk measures. Strikingly, the general risk question predicts all behaviors whereas the standard lottery measure does not. The best predictor for any specific behavior is typically the corresponding context-specific measure.\",\"PeriodicalId\":105371,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Public Health Law & Policy\",\"volume\":\"12 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2005-09-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"856\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Public Health Law & Policy\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.807408\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Public Health Law & Policy","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.807408","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 856

摘要

本文使用一套新颖的调查问题和大约22,000名居住在德国的个人的代表性样本,提出了关于人口中风险态度分布的新证据。使用一个关于冒险意愿的问题,在11分的尺度上,我们发现了个体异质性的证据,并表明冒险意愿与年龄和女性负相关,与身高和父母教育呈正相关。我们通过对450名受试者的代表性样本进行补充性现场实验来检验该调查措施的行为相关性,并发现一般风险问题是实际冒险行为的良好预测因子。然后,我们在22,000个样本中使用更标准的彩票问题来衡量风险偏好,并发现与一般风险问题相比,关于风险偏好的异质性和决定因素的类似结果。彩票问题也使得估计样本中每个个体的相对风险厌恶系数成为可能。通过五个关于在特定领域(汽车驾驶、金融事务、体育和休闲、职业和健康)冒险意愿的问题,论文还研究了环境对风险态度的影响,发现环境之间存在强烈但不完美的相关性。本文利用来自不同背景的一系列风险行为的数据,包括交通违规、投资组合选择、吸烟、职业选择、参与体育运动和移民,比较了所有风险度量的预测能力。引人注目的是,一般的风险问题预测了所有的行为,而标准的彩票测量却不能。任何特定行为的最佳预测器通常是相应的特定于上下文的测量。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Individual Risk Attitudes: New Evidence from a Large, Representative, Experimentally-Validated Survey
This paper presents new evidence on the distribution of risk attitudes in the population, using a novel set of survey questions and a representative sample of roughly 22,000 individuals living in Germany. Using a question that asks about willingness to take risks in general, on an 11-point scale, we find evidence of heterogeneity across individuals, and show that willingness to take risks is negatively related to age and being female, and positively related to height and parental education. We test the behavioral relevance of this survey measure by conducting a complementary field experiment, based on a representative sample of 450 subjects, and find that the general risk question is a good predictor of actual risk-taking behavior. We then use a more standard lottery question to measure risk preferences in our sample of 22,000, and find similar results regarding heterogeneity and determinants of risk preferences, compared to the general risk question. The lottery question also makes it possible to estimate the coefficient of relative risk aversion for each individual in the sample. Using five questions about willingness to take risks in specific domains - car driving, financial matters, sports and leisure, career, and health - the paper also studies the impact of context on risk attitudes, finding a strong but imperfect correlation across contexts. Using data on a collection of risky behaviors from different contexts, including traffic offences, portfolio choice, smoking, occupational choice, participation in sports, and migration, the paper compares the predictive power of all of the risk measures. Strikingly, the general risk question predicts all behaviors whereas the standard lottery measure does not. The best predictor for any specific behavior is typically the corresponding context-specific measure.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信