IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/bge/wpaper/1117.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Random Models for the Joint Treatment of Risk and Time Preferences

Author

Listed:
  • Jose Apesteguia
  • Miguel Ángel Ballester
  • Angelo Gutierrez

Abstract

We develop a simple, tractable and sound stochastic framework for the joint treatment of risk and time preferences, in order to facilitate the estimation of risk and time attitudes. In so doing we: (i) study deterministic models of risk and time preferences paying special attention to their comparative statics, (ii) embed the deterministic models and their comparative statics within the random utility framework, and (iii) show how to estimate them, illustrating this exercise on several experimental datasets.

Suggested Citation

  • Jose Apesteguia & Miguel Ángel Ballester & Angelo Gutierrez, 2019. "Random Models for the Joint Treatment of Risk and Time Preferences," Working Papers 1117, Barcelona School of Economics.
    • Handle: RePEc:bge:wpaper:1117
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.barcelonagse.eu/sites/default/files/working_paper_pdfs/1117_0.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Thomas Dohmen & Armin Falk & David Huffman & Uwe Sunde, 2010. "Are Risk Aversion and Impatience Related to Cognitive Ability?," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 100(3), pages 1238-1260, June.
    2. Patrick DeJarnette & David Dillenberger & Daniel Gottlieb & Pietro Ortoleva, 2020. "Time Lotteries and Stochastic Impatience," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 88(2), pages 619-656, March.
    3. Chew, Soo Hong & Epstein, Larry G., 1990. "Nonexpected utility preferences in a temporal framework with an application to consumption-savings behaviour," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 50(1), pages 54-81, February.
    4. Quang Nguyen & Colin Camerer & Tomomi Tanaka, 2010. "Risk and Time Preferences Linking Experimental and Household Data from Vietnam," Post-Print halshs-00547090, HAL.
    5. Larry G. Epstein & Stanley E. Zin, 2013. "Substitution, risk aversion and the temporal behavior of consumption and asset returns: A theoretical framework," World Scientific Book Chapters, in: Leonard C MacLean & William T Ziemba (ed.), HANDBOOK OF THE FUNDAMENTALS OF FINANCIAL DECISION MAKING Part I, chapter 12, pages 207-239, World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd..
    6. Stephen L. Cheung, 2015. "Risk Preferences Are Not Time Preferences: On the Elicitation of Time Preference under Conditions of Risk: Comment," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 105(7), pages 2242-2260, July.
    7. Bin Miao & Songfa Zhong, 2015. "Risk Preferences Are Not Time Preferences: Separating Risk and Time Preference: Comment," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 105(7), pages 2272-2286, July.
    8. Selden, Larry, 1978. "A New Representation of Preferences over "Certain A Uncertain" Consumption Pairs: The "Ordinal Certainty Equivalent" Hypothesis," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 46(5), pages 1045-1060, September.
    9. Quiggin, John, 1982. "A theory of anticipated utility," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 3(4), pages 323-343, December.
    10. Tomomi Tanaka & Colin F. Camerer & Quang Nguyen, 2010. "Risk and Time Preferences: Linking Experimental and Household Survey Data from Vietnam," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 100(1), pages 557-571, March.
    11. Keith Coble & Jayson Lusk, 2010. "At the nexus of risk and time preferences: An experimental investigation," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 41(1), pages 67-79, August.
    12. Thomas Epper & Helga Fehr-Duda, 2015. "Risk Preferences Are Not Time Preferences: Balancing on a Budget Line: Comment," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 105(7), pages 2261-2271, July.
    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. Brañas-Garza, Pablo & Estepa-Mohedano, Lorenzo & Jorrat, Diego & Orozco, Victor & Rascón-Ramírez, Ericka, 2021. "To pay or not to pay: Measuring risk preferences in lab and field," Judgment and Decision Making, Cambridge University Press, vol. 16(5), pages 1290-1313, September.
    2. David Dillenberger & Daniel Gottlieb & Pietro Ortoleva, 2017. "Stochastic Impatience and the Separation of Time and Risk Preferences," PIER Working Paper Archive 20-026, Penn Institute for Economic Research, Department of Economics, University of Pennsylvania, revised 05 Jul 2020.
    3. Patrick DeJarnette & David Dillenberger & Daniel Gottlieb & Pietro Ortoleva, 2020. "Time Lotteries and Stochastic Impatience," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 88(2), pages 619-656, March.
    4. Brañas-Garza, Pablo & Estepa-Mohedano, Lorenzo & Jorrat, Diego & Orozco, Victor & Rascón-Ramírez, Ericka, 2021. "To pay or not to pay: Measuring risk preferences in lab and field," Judgment and Decision Making, Cambridge University Press, vol. 16(5), pages 1290-1313, September.
    5. repec:cup:judgdm:v:16:y:2021:i:5:p:1290-1313 is not listed on IDEAS

    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. Jinrui Pan & Craig S. Webb & Horst Zank, 2019. "Delayed probabilistic risk attitude: a parametric approach," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 87(2), pages 201-232, September.
    2. Yan Chen & Ming Jiang & Erin L. Krupka, 2019. "Hunger and the gender gap," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 22(4), pages 885-917, December.
    3. AJ A. Bostian & Christoph Heinzel, 2016. "Consumption Smoothing and Precautionary Saving under Recursive Preferences," FOODSECURE Working papers 44, LEI Wageningen UR.
    4. W. David Bradford & Paul Dolan & Matteo M. Galizzi, 2019. "Looking ahead: Subjective time perception and individual discounting," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 58(1), pages 43-69, February.
    5. Lanier, Joshua & Miao, Bin & Quah, John & Zhong, Songfa, 2018. "Intertemporal Consumption with Risk: A Revealed Preference Analysis," MPRA Paper 101407, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    6. Patrick DeJarnette & David Dillenberger & Daniel Gottlieb & Pietro Ortoleva, 2020. "Time Lotteries and Stochastic Impatience," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 88(2), pages 619-656, March.
    7. Oscar Lau C., 2019. "Disentangling Intertemporal Substitution and Risk Aversion Under the Expected Utility Theorem," The B.E. Journal of Theoretical Economics, De Gruyter, vol. 19(2), pages 1-14, June.
    8. Choi, Kyoung Jin & Kwak, Minsuk & Shim, Gyoocheol, 2017. "Time preference and real investment," Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control, Elsevier, vol. 83(C), pages 18-33.
    9. Mark Schneider, 2016. "Dual Process Utility Theory: A Model of Decisions Under Risk and Over Time," Working Papers 16-23, Chapman University, Economic Science Institute.
    10. David Dillenberger & Daniel Gottlieb & Pietro Ortoleva, 2017. "Stochastic Impatience and the Separation of Time and Risk Preferences," PIER Working Paper Archive 20-026, Penn Institute for Economic Research, Department of Economics, University of Pennsylvania, revised 05 Jul 2020.
    11. Kubler, Felix & Selden, Larry & Wei, Xiao, 2020. "Incomplete market demand tests for Kreps-Porteus-Selden preferences," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 185(C).
    12. Cheung, Stephen L., 2016. "Recent developments in the experimental elicitation of time preference," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Finance, Elsevier, vol. 11(C), pages 1-8.
    13. Rodriguez-Lara, Ismael & Ponti, Giovanni, 2017. "Social motives vs social influence: An experiment on interdependent time preferences," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 105(C), pages 177-194.
    14. Bommier, Antoine & Chassagnon, Arnold & Le Grand, François, 2012. "Comparative risk aversion: A formal approach with applications to saving behavior," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 147(4), pages 1614-1641.
    15. Aj A Bostian & Christoph Heinzel, 2020. "Robustness of Inferences in Risk and Time Experiments to Lifecycle Asset Integration," Post-Print hal-03358620, HAL.
    16. Ehsan Taheri & Chen Wang, 2018. "Eliciting Public Risk Preferences in Emergency Situations," Decision Analysis, INFORMS, vol. 15(4), pages 223-241, December.
    17. Stephen L. Cheung, 2020. "Eliciting utility curvature in time preference," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 23(2), pages 493-525, June.
    18. Jonathan Cohen & Keith Marzilli Ericson & David Laibson & John Myles White, 2020. "Measuring Time Preferences," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 58(2), pages 299-347, June.
    19. Mu Zhang, 2021. "A Theory of Choice Bracketing under Risk," Papers 2102.07286, arXiv.org, revised Aug 2021.
    20. Ola Andersson & Håkan J. Holm & Jean-Robert Tyran & Erik Wengström, 2016. "Deciding for Others Reduces Loss Aversion," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 62(1), pages 29-36, January.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    risk preferences; time preferences; comparative statics; stochastic choice; random utility models; discrete choice;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • C01 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - General - - - Econometrics
    • D01 - Microeconomics - - General - - - Microeconomic Behavior: Underlying Principles

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    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:bge:wpaper:1117. 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: Bruno Guallar (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/bargses.html .

    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.