Emotional reactions to losing explain gender differences in entering a risky lottery
AbstractA gender difference in risk preferences, with women being more averse to risky choices, is a robust experimental finding. Speculating on the sources of this difference, Croson and Gneezy recently pointed to the tendency for women to experience emotions more strongly and suggested that feeling more strongly about negative outcomes would lead to greater risk-aversion. Here we test this hypothesis in an international survey with 424 respondents from India and 416 from US where we ask questions about a hypothetical lottery. In both countries we find that emotions about outcomes are stronger among women, and that this effect partially mediates gender difference in willingness to enter the lottery.
Download InfoIf you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.
Bibliographic InfoArticle provided by Society for Judgment and Decision Making in its journal Judgment and Decision Making.
Volume (Year): 5 (2010)
Issue (Month): 3 (June)
Contact details of provider:
lottery; risk preferences; gender differences; country differences.;
You can help add them by filling out this form.
CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
- Julie A. Nelson, 2012.
"Are Women Really More Risk-Averse than Men?,"
GDAE Working Papers
12-05, GDAE, Tufts University.
- Chandler, Dana & Kapelner, Adam, 2013. "Breaking monotony with meaning: Motivation in crowdsourcing markets," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 90(C), pages 123-133.
- Wieland, Alice & Sarin, Rakesh, 2012. "Domain specificity of sex differences in competition," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 83(1), pages 151-157.
- Jiaxi Peng & Danmin Miao & Wei Xiao, 2013. "Why are gainers more risk seeking," Judgment and Decision Making, Society for Judgment and Decision Making, vol. 8(2), pages 150-160, March.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Jonathan Baron).
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.