IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/joacli/v33y2014i1p58-84.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Prospect Theory predictions in the field: Risk seekers in settings of weak accounting controls

Author

Listed:
  • Abdel-khalik, A. Rashad

Abstract

In his review of 30 years of research in Prospect Theory, Barberis (2013) notes that support for Prospect Theory had come mainly from the laboratory. In this paper, I write about a recurring phenomenon in real life that is consistent with Prospect Theory predictions in decision-making loss domain. The 60 cases noted in this paper are associated with specific risk seekers that had cost more than $140 billion (an average of $2.33 billion per case). Given space consider–ations, I provide synopses for 14 cases. A few of these cases have been discussed in the extant literature in connection with internal control, but were not considered from the perspective of Prospect Theory. It is striking that these cases are costly, all participants are young men, and almost all had followed the gambler's martingale strategy – i.e., double down. While these cases are informative about risk-seeking behavior, they are not sufficiently systematic to be subjected to stylized archival research methods.

Suggested Citation

  • Abdel-khalik, A. Rashad, 2014. "Prospect Theory predictions in the field: Risk seekers in settings of weak accounting controls," Journal of Accounting Literature, Elsevier, vol. 33(1), pages 58-84.
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:joacli:v:33:y:2014:i:1:p:58-84
    DOI: 10.1016/j.acclit.2014.10.001
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0737460714000056
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.acclit.2014.10.001?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Tversky, Amos & Kahneman, Daniel, 1992. "Advances in Prospect Theory: Cumulative Representation of Uncertainty," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 5(4), pages 297-323, October.
    2. Daniel Kahneman & Amos Tversky, 2013. "Prospect Theory: An Analysis of Decision Under Risk," World Scientific Book Chapters, in: Leonard C MacLean & William T Ziemba (ed.), HANDBOOK OF THE FUNDAMENTALS OF FINANCIAL DECISION MAKING Part I, chapter 6, pages 99-127, World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd..
    3. Nicholas C. Barberis, 2013. "Thirty Years of Prospect Theory in Economics: A Review and Assessment," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 27(1), pages 173-196, Winter.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Hagen Rafeld & Sebastian G. Fritz-Morgenthal & Peter N. Posch, 2020. "Whale Watching on the Trading Floor: Unravelling Collusive Rogue Trading in Banks," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 165(4), pages 633-657, September.
    2. Westgaard, Sjur & Frydenberg, Stein & Mohanty, Sunil K., 2022. "Fourteen large commodity trading disasters: What happened and what can we learn?," Journal of Commodity Markets, Elsevier, vol. 27(C).

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Carolin Bock & Maximilian Schmidt, 2015. "Should I stay, or should I go? – How fund dynamics influence venture capital exit decisions," Review of Financial Economics, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 27(1), pages 68-82, November.
    2. Klein, Martin & Deissenroth, Marc, 2017. "When do households invest in solar photovoltaics? An application of prospect theory," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 109(C), pages 270-278.
    3. Alex Imas & Sally Sadoff & Anya Samek, 2017. "Do People Anticipate Loss Aversion?," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 63(5), pages 1271-1284, May.
    4. Jakusch, Sven Thorsten, 2017. "On the applicability of maximum likelihood methods: From experimental to financial data," SAFE Working Paper Series 148, Leibniz Institute for Financial Research SAFE, revised 2017.
    5. Carpentier, A. & Reboud, X., 2018. "Why farmers consider pesticides the ultimate in crop protection: economic and behavioral insights," 2018 Conference, July 28-August 2, 2018, Vancouver, British Columbia 277528, International Association of Agricultural Economists.
    6. Bryce McLaughlin & Jann Spiess, 2022. "Algorithmic Assistance with Recommendation-Dependent Preferences," Papers 2208.07626, arXiv.org, revised Jan 2024.
    7. Mariya Burdina & Scott Hiller, 2021. "When Falling Just Short is a Good Thing: The Effect of Past Performance on Improvement," Journal of Sports Economics, , vol. 22(7), pages 777-798, October.
    8. Häckel, Björn & Pfosser, Stefan & Tränkler, Timm, 2017. "Explaining the energy efficiency gap - Expected Utility Theory versus Cumulative Prospect Theory," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 111(C), pages 414-426.
    9. Mohit Anand & Ruiqing Miao & Madhu Khanna, 2019. "Adopting bioenergy crops: Does farmers’ attitude toward loss matter?," Agricultural Economics, International Association of Agricultural Economists, vol. 50(4), pages 435-450, July.
    10. repec:dgr:rugsom:14022-eef is not listed on IDEAS
    11. Edsel L. Beja, 2017. "The Asymmetric Effects of Macroeconomic Performance on Happiness: Evidence for the EU," Intereconomics: Review of European Economic Policy, Springer;ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics;Centre for European Policy Studies (CEPS), vol. 52(3), pages 184-190, May.
    12. de Koning, Koen & Filatova, Tatiana & Bin, Okmyung, 2017. "Bridging the Gap Between Revealed and Stated Preferences in Flood-prone Housing Markets," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 136(C), pages 1-13.
    13. Dian Yu & Jianjun Gao & Weiping Wu & Zizhuo Wang, 2022. "Price Interpretability of Prediction Markets: A Convergence Analysis," Papers 2205.08913, arXiv.org, revised Nov 2023.
    14. Amedeo Piolatto & Matthew D. Rablen, 2017. "Prospect theory and tax evasion: a reconsideration of the Yitzhaki puzzle," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 82(4), pages 543-565, April.
    15. Doron Sonsino & Mosi Rosenboim & Tal Shavit, 2017. "The valuation “by-tranche” of composite investment instruments," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 82(3), pages 353-393, March.
    16. Andrea Lippi & Laura Barbieri & Mariacristina Piva & Werner De Bondt, 2018. "Time-varying risk behavior and prior investment outcomes: Evidence from Italy," Judgment and Decision Making, Society for Judgment and Decision Making, vol. 13(5), pages 471-483, September.
    17. Khan, Abhimanyu, 2022. "Expected utility versus cumulative prospect theory in an evolutionary model of bargaining," Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control, Elsevier, vol. 137(C).
    18. Stephen G Dimmock & Roy Kouwenberg & Olivia S Mitchell & Kim Peijnenburg, 2021. "Household Portfolio Underdiversification and Probability Weighting: Evidence from the Field," The Review of Financial Studies, Society for Financial Studies, vol. 34(9), pages 4524-4563.
    19. Chi, Yichun & Zheng, Jiakun & Zhuang, Shengchao, 2022. "S-shaped narrow framing, skewness and the demand for insurance," Insurance: Mathematics and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 105(C), pages 279-292.
    20. Jaroslava Hlouskova & Jana Mikocziova & Rudolf Sivak & Peter Tsigaris, 2014. "Capital Income Taxation and Risk-Taking under Prospect Theory: The Continuous Distribution Case," Czech Journal of Economics and Finance (Finance a uver), Charles University Prague, Faculty of Social Sciences, vol. 64(5), pages 374-391, November.
    21. Rohde, Nicholas & Tang, Kam Ki & D’Ambrosio, Conchita & Osberg, Lars & Rao, Prasada, 2020. "Welfare-based income insecurity in the us and germany: evidence from harmonized panel data," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 176(C), pages 226-243.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Loss of control; Gambler's martingale; Risk seeking; Prospect Theory; Decision-making under stress; Fraud; Financial Derivatives; Accounting systems;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • D8 - Microeconomics - - Information, Knowledge, and Uncertainty
    • D42 - Microeconomics - - Market Structure, Pricing, and Design - - - Monopoly
    • G32 - Financial Economics - - Corporate Finance and Governance - - - Financing Policy; Financial Risk and Risk Management; Capital and Ownership Structure; Value of Firms; Goodwill
    • M1 - Business Administration and Business Economics; Marketing; Accounting; Personnel Economics - - Business Administration
    • M4 - Business Administration and Business Economics; Marketing; Accounting; Personnel Economics - - Accounting
    • M10 - Business Administration and Business Economics; Marketing; Accounting; Personnel Economics - - Business Administration - - - General
    • M40 - Business Administration and Business Economics; Marketing; Accounting; Personnel Economics - - Accounting - - - General

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:joacli:v:33:y:2014:i:1:p:58-84. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.journals.elsevier.com/journal-of-accounting-literature .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.