Risk preference instability across institutions: a dilemma.

In this article we use laboratory experiments to ask a fundamental question: Do individuals behave as if their risk preferences are stable across institutions? In particular, we study the decisions of cash-motivated subjects in the repeated play of three different institutions: a value elicitation procedure for the sale of a risky asset, an English clock auction for the sale of a risky asset, and a first-price auction for the purchase of a riskless asset. We first do a simple categorical comparison of each subject's risk preferences across tasks by comparing the individual's decisions with an expected value maximizer. All subjects acted as if they were risk-loving in the English clock auctions and risk-averse in the first-price auctions. In the Becker, Degroot, and Marschack procedure, behavior was split between risk-loving and risk-averse bidding. For each institution we also estimate an individual's risk coefficient. We test the hypotheses that for the same individuals the estimated risk coefficient across institutions is the same. We find that these estimates are statistically different.

[1]  William Vickrey,et al.  Counterspeculation, Auctions, And Competitive Sealed Tenders , 1961 .

[2]  P. Slovic,et al.  ASSESSMENT OF RISK TAKING BEHAVIOR. , 1964, Psychological bulletin.

[3]  M. Degroot,et al.  Measuring utility by a single-response sequential method. , 1964, Behavioral science.

[4]  V. Smith Microeconomic Systems as an Experimental Science , 1982 .

[5]  Joyce E. Berg,et al.  Controlling Preferences for Lotteries on Units of Experimental Exchange , 1986 .

[6]  Stephen J. Rassenti,et al.  Auction Institutional Design: Theory and Behavior of Simultaneous Multiple Unit Generalizations of the Dutch and English Auctions , 1990 .

[7]  Bernard Salanié,et al.  The Economics of Contracts: A Primer , 1997 .

[8]  F Sainfort,et al.  Eliciting consumer preferences for health plans. , 1999, Health services research.

[9]  Duncan James,et al.  Just Who Are You Calling Risk Averse? , 2000 .

[10]  Charles A. Holt,et al.  Risk Aversion and Incentive Effects , 2002 .

[11]  Joel S. Demski,et al.  Accounting Theory: An Information Content Perspective , 2002 .

[12]  Kip Smith,et al.  The impact of the certainty context on the process of choice , 2003, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[13]  D. Streiner,et al.  Stability of maternal preferences for pediatric health states in the perinatal period and 1 year later. , 2003, Archives of pediatrics & adolescent medicine.

[14]  Thomas A. Rietz,et al.  Preference Reversals and Induced Risk Preferences: Evidence for Noisy Maximization , 2003 .

[15]  G. Harrison,et al.  Field Experiments in Economics , 2005 .