Risk‐Taking Behavior: An Experimental Analysis of Individuals and Dyads

Deck, Cary; Lee, Jungmin; Reyes, Javier A.; Rosen, Chris

doi:10.4284/0038-4038-2010.026

Cited by 32 publications

(19 citation statements)

References 53 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In line with these efforts, various studies have investigated the relation between risk taking and the Big Five personality factors. Although the results are mixed, there is some evidence that individual differences in personality may be related to risk-taking behavior: Risk taking has been found to be positively associated with openness to experience, extraversion, and sensation seeking; and negatively associated with agreeableness and neuroticism (Becker, Decker, Dohmen, Falk, & Kosse, 2012; Deck, Jungmin, Reyes, & Rosen, 2012; Mishra & Lalumière, 2011; Nicholson et al, 2005; Prinz, Gründer, Hilgers, Holtemöller, & Vernaleken, 2014). There are also some findings linking personality variables to performance on behavioral measures of risk taking, such as the Iowa Gambling or the Balloon Analogue Risk Task.…”

Section: The Concept Of Risk-taking Propensity and Potential Changes mentioning

confidence: 99%

Stability and change in risk-taking propensity across the adult life span.

Josef¹,

Richter²,

Samanez-Larkin³

et al. 2016

Journal of Personality and Social Psychology

228

203

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Can risk-taking propensity be thought of as a trait that captures individual differences across domains, measures, and time? Studying stability in risk-taking propensities across the lifespan can help to answer such questions by uncovering parallel, or divergent, trajectories across domains and measures. We contribute to this effort by using data from respondents aged 18 to 85 in the German Socio-Economic Panel Study (SOEP) and by examining (1) differential stability, (2) mean-level differences, and (3) individual-level changes in self-reported general (N = 44,076) and domain-specific (N =11,903) risk-taking propensities across adulthood. In addition, we investigate (4) the correspondence between cross-sectional trajectories of self-report and behavioral measures of social (trust game; N = 646) and nonsocial (monetary gamble; N = 433) risk taking. The results suggest that risk-taking propensity can be understood as a trait with moderate stability. Results show reliable mean-level differences across the lifespan, with risk-taking propensities typically decreasing with age, although significant variation emerges across domains and individuals. Interestingly, the mean-level trajectory for behavioral measures of social and nonsocial risk taking was similar to those obtained from self-reported risk, despite small correlations between task behavior and self-reports. Individual-level analyses suggest a link between changes in risk-taking propensities both across domains and in relation to changes in some of the Big Five personality traits. Overall, these results raise important questions concerning the role of common processes or events that shape the lifespan development of risk-taking across domains as well as other major personality facets.

show abstract

Section: The Concept Of Risk-taking Propensity and Potential Changes mentioning

confidence: 99%

Stability and change in risk-taking propensity across the adult life span.

Josef¹,

Richter²,

Samanez-Larkin³

et al. 2016

Journal of Personality and Social Psychology

228

203

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Importantly, this literature differs from the literature on group decision making, which focuses on situations where a whole group makes a unique decision after deliberation (Blinder and Morgan 2005;Kocher et al 2006;Baker et al 2008;Shupp and Williams 2008;Ambrus et al 2009;Sheremata and Zhang 2010;Deck et al 2012;Zhang and Casari 2012). A main conclusion from the emerging body of literature on individual decisions made in a group environment is that individuals are more risk averse when they are in a group setting that when they are alone (see, e.g., Masclet et al 2009).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Are individuals more risk and ambiguity averse in a group environment or alone? Results from an experimental study

Brunette,

Cabantous,

Couture

2014

Theory Decis

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This is the accepted version of the paper.This version of the publication may differ from the final published version. Most decision-making research in economics focuses on individual decisions. Yet, we know, from psychological research in particular, that individual preferences can be sensitive to social pressures. In this paper, we study the impact of a group environment on individual preferences for risky (i.e., known probabilities) and ambiguous (i.e., unknown probabilities) prospects. In our experiment, each participant was invited to make a series of lottery-choice decisions in two different conditions. In the Alone condition, individuals made private choices whereas in the Group condition, individuals belonged to a three-person group and groupmembers' choices were aggregated according to either a majority or unanimity rule. This design allows us to study the impact of a group environment on individuals' attitude towards both risky and ambiguous prospects while controlling for the decision rule used in the group. Our experimental results show that when individuals are in the Group condition, they tend to be less risk averse and more ambiguity averse than when they are not part of a group (Alone condition). Our experiment also suggests that the decision rule matters as it shows that these two trends tend to be stronger when the group implements a unanimity rule. Specifically, we found that individuals who belong to a group implementing a unanimity rule are significantly less risk averse than individuals who belong to a group that relies on the majority rule. We obtained a similar -but non-significant -result under ambiguity. Permanent repository link

show abstract

“…Much of this work is done using survey data, but experimental economists are beginning to explore personality traits,which are easily measured in the laboratory (e.g., Deck et al 2012, Feliz-Ozbay et al 2013, Fréchette et al 2013, Proto and Rustichini 2013.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Personality and cooperation in finitely repeated prisoner’s dilemma games

Kagel

McGee

2014

Economics Letters

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

We investigate the role personality plays in Finitely Repeated Prisoner's Dilemma (FRPD) games. Even after controlling for demographic factors such as race, course of study, and cognitive ability, we find that cooperative behavior is significantly related to the Big Five personality trait Agreeableness. A one standard deviation increase in agreeableness increases the predicted probability of cooperation by a subject with modal demographic characteristics from 67.9% to 80.6%.

show abstract

Risk‐Taking Behavior: An Experimental Analysis of Individuals and Dyads

Cited by 32 publications

References 53 publications

Stability and change in risk-taking propensity across the adult life span.

Stability and change in risk-taking propensity across the adult life span.

Are individuals more risk and ambiguity averse in a group environment or alone? Results from an experimental study

Personality and cooperation in finitely repeated prisoner’s dilemma games

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About