IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jgames/v6y2015i4p560-573d57807.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Risk Aversion and Engagement in the Sharing Economy

Author

Listed:
  • Jessica Santana

    (Department of Sociology, Stanford University, 450 Serra Mall, Stanford, CA 94305, USA)

  • Paolo Parigi

    (Institute for Research in the Social Sciences, Stanford University, 30 Alta Road, Stanford, CA 94305, USA)

Abstract

The sharing economy is a new online community that has important implications for offline behavior. This study evaluates whether engagement in the sharing economy is associated with an actor’s aversion to risk. Using a web-based survey and a field experiment, we apply an adaptation of Holt and Laury’s (2002) risk lottery game to a representative sample of sharing economy participants. We find that frequency of activity in the sharing economy predicts risk aversion, but only in interaction with satisfaction. While greater satisfaction with sharing economy websites is associated with a decrease in risk aversion, greater frequency of usage is associated with greater risk aversion. This analysis shows the limitations of a static perspective on how risk attitudes relate to participation in the sharing economy.

Suggested Citation

  • Jessica Santana & Paolo Parigi, 2015. "Risk Aversion and Engagement in the Sharing Economy," Games, MDPI, vol. 6(4), pages 1-14, October.
  • Handle: RePEc:gam:jgames:v:6:y:2015:i:4:p:560-573:d:57807
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2073-4336/6/4/560/pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2073-4336/6/4/560/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Houser, Daniel & Schunk, Daniel & Winter, Joachim, 2010. "Distinguishing trust from risk: An anatomy of the investment game," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 74(1-2), pages 72-81, May.
    2. Charles A. Holt & Susan K. Laury, 2002. "Risk Aversion and Incentive Effects," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 92(5), pages 1644-1655, December.
    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. Katarzyna Czernek & Dagmara Wójcik & Paweł Marszałek, 2018. "Zaufanie w gospodarce współdzielenia," Gospodarka Narodowa. The Polish Journal of Economics, Warsaw School of Economics, issue 3, pages 23-48.
    2. Tomasz Zalega, 2020. "The Sharing Economy and the Behaviour of Young Polish Singles: The Case of BlaBlaCar," Gospodarka Narodowa. The Polish Journal of Economics, Warsaw School of Economics, issue 4, pages 105-134.
    3. Rong, Ke & Sun, Hui & Li, Dun & Zhou, Di, 2021. "Matching as Service Provision of Sharing Economy Platforms: An Information Processing Perspective," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 171(C).
    4. Xiaoyi Chen & Sarah Cheah & Ao Shen, 2019. "Empirical Study on Behavioral Intentions of Short-Term Rental Tenants—The Moderating Role of Past Experience," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(12), pages 1-18, June.
    5. Steven Kane Curtis & Matthias Lehner, 2019. "Defining the Sharing Economy for Sustainability," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(3), pages 1-25, January.
    6. Pastuh, Daniel & Geppert, Mike, 2020. "A "Circuits of Power"-based Perspective on Algorithmic Management and Labour in the Gig Economy [Algorithmisches Management und Arbeitsbeziehungen in der Plattformökonomie - Eine "C," Industrielle Beziehungen. Zeitschrift für Arbeit, Organisation und Management, Verlag Barbara Budrich, vol. 27(2), pages 179-204.
    7. Lim, Weng Marc, 2020. "The sharing economy: A marketing perspective," Australasian marketing journal, Elsevier, vol. 28(3), pages 4-13.
    8. Igor M. Stepnov & Yulia A. Kovalchuk, 2020. "Measuring value created by business models in the sharing economy," Upravlenets, Ural State University of Economics, vol. 11(5), pages 58-69, November.
    9. Maria Nadia Postorino & Giuseppe M. L. Sarnè, 2023. "Using Reputation Scores to Foster Car-Sharing Activities," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(4), pages 1-24, February.
    10. Yuchen Gao & Jingrui Chen, 2019. "The Risk Reduction and Sustainable Development of Shared Transportation: The Chinese Online Car-hailing Policy Evaluation in the Digitalization Era," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(9), pages 1-21, May.
    11. van der Cruijsen, Carin & Doll, Maurice & van Hoenselaar, Frank, 2019. "Trust in other people and the usage of peer platform markets," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 166(C), pages 751-766.
    12. Erickson, Kristofer & Sørensen, Inge, 2016. "Regulating the sharing economy," Internet Policy Review: Journal on Internet Regulation, Alexander von Humboldt Institute for Internet and Society (HIIG), Berlin, vol. 5(2), pages 1-13.
    13. Meisam Ranjbari & Gustavo Morales-Alonso & Ruth Carrasco-Gallego, 2018. "Conceptualizing the Sharing Economy through Presenting a Comprehensive Framework," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(7), pages 1-24, July.

    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. Anne Corcos & François Pannequin & Sacha Bourgeois-Gironde, 2012. "Aversions to Trust," Recherches économiques de Louvain, De Boeck Université, vol. 78(3), pages 115-134.
    2. Paolo Crosetto & Antonio Filippin & Janna Heider, 2015. "A Study of Outcome Reporting Bias Using Gender Differences in Risk Attitudes," CESifo Economic Studies, CESifo Group, vol. 61(1), pages 239-262.
    3. Charles Bellemare & Luc Bissonnette & Sabine Kröger, 2010. "Bounding preference parameters under different assumptions about beliefs: a partial identification approach," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 13(3), pages 334-345, September.
    4. Jan-Erik Loennqvist & Markku Verkasalo & Gari Walkowitz & Philipp C. Wichardt, 2011. "Measuring Individual Risk Attitudes in the Lab: Task or Ask? An Empirical Comparison," Cologne Graduate School Working Paper Series 02-03, Cologne Graduate School in Management, Economics and Social Sciences.
    5. Jing, Lin & Cheo, Roland, 2013. "House money effects, risk preferences and the public goods game," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 120(2), pages 310-313.
    6. Cárdenas, Juan Camilo & Chong, Alberto & Ñopo, Hugo, 2013. "Stated social behavior and revealed actions: Evidence from six Latin American countries," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 104(C), pages 16-33.
    7. Johansson-Stenman, Olof & Mahmud, Minhaj & Martinsson, Peter, 2013. "Trust, trust games and stated trust: Evidence from rural Bangladesh," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 95(C), pages 286-298.
    8. Olivier Bonroy & Alexis Garapin & Hamilton Stephen & Diogo Souza-Monteiro, 2018. "Free-riding on product quality in cooperatives: lessons from an experiment," Post-Print hal-01815808, HAL.
    9. Olli Lappalainen, 2018. "Cooperation and Strategic Complementarity: An Experiment with Two Voluntary Contribution Mechanism Games with Interior Equilibria," Games, MDPI, vol. 9(3), pages 1-24, July.
    10. Lönnqvist, Jan-Erik & Verkasalo, Markku & Walkowitz, Gari & Wichardt, Philipp C., 2015. "Measuring individual risk attitudes in the lab: Task or ask? An empirical comparison," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 119(C), pages 254-266.
    11. Quang Nguyen & Marie Claire Villeval & Hui Xu, 2012. "Trust and Trustworthiness under the Prospect Theory: A field experiment in Vietnam," Working Papers halshs-00730609, HAL.
    12. Filippin, Antonio & Crosetto, Paolo, 2014. "A Reconsideration of Gender Differences in Risk Attitudes," IZA Discussion Papers 8184, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    13. Norbert Hirschauer & Oliver Musshoff & Syster C. Maart-Noelck & Sven Gruener, 2014. "Eliciting risk attitudes -- how to avoid mean and variance bias in Holt-and-Laury lotteries," Applied Economics Letters, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 21(1), pages 35-38, January.
    14. Yan Chen & Iman YeckehZaare & Ark Fangzhou Zhang, 2018. "Real or bogus: Predicting susceptibility to phishing with economic experiments," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 13(6), pages 1-18, June.
    15. Fischer, Sabine & Wollni, Meike, 2018. "The role of farmers’ trust, risk and time preferences for contract choices: Experimental evidence from the Ghanaian pineapple sector," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 81(C), pages 67-81.
    16. Fairley, Kim & Sanfey, Alan & Vyrastekova, Jana & Weitzel, Utz, 2012. "Social risk and ambiguity in the trust game," MPRA Paper 42302, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    17. Ihli, Hanna Julia & Chiputwa, Brian & Musshoff, Oliver, 2016. "Do Changing Probabilities or Payoffs in Lottery-Choice Experiments Affect Risk Preference Outcomes? Evidence from Rural Uganda," Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Western Agricultural Economics Association, vol. 41(2), May.
    18. Lora R. Todorova & Bodo Vogt, 2012. "Are Behavioral Choices in the Ultimatum and Investment Games Strategic?," FEMM Working Papers 120021, Otto-von-Guericke University Magdeburg, Faculty of Economics and Management.
    19. Aidin Hajikhameneh & Erik O. Kimbrough, 2019. "Individualism, collectivism, and trade," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 22(2), pages 294-324, June.
    20. Jason Aimone & Daniel Houser, 2012. "What you don’t know won’t hurt you: a laboratory analysis of betrayal aversion," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 15(4), pages 571-588, December.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    risk; online; sharing economy;
    All these keywords.

    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:gam:jgames:v:6:y:2015:i:4:p:560-573:d:57807. 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: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    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.