Anna Conte () (University of Westminster) Peter G. Moffatt () (School of Economics, University of East Anglia) Fabrizio Botti () (Department of Social, Economic, Actuarial and Demographic Studies, Sapienza University of Rome) Daniela T. Di Cagno () (Department of Economic and Business Sciences, LUISS Guido Carli) Carlo D'Ippoliti () (Department of Social, Economic, Actuarial and Demographic Studies, Sapienza University of Rome)
Additional information is available for the following
registered author(s):
Data on contestantsÕ choices in Italian Game Show Affari Tuoi are analysed in a way that separates the effect of risk attitude (preferences) from that of beliefs concerning the amount of money that will be offered to contestants in future rounds. The most important issue addressed in the paper is what belief function is actually being used by contestants. The parameters of this function are estimated freely along with the parameters of a choice model. Separate identification of the belief function and preferences is possible by virtue of the fact that at a certain stage of the game, beliefs are not relevant, and risk attitude is the sole determinant of choice. The rational expectations hypothesis is tested by comparing the estimated belief function with the ÒtrueÓ offer function which is estimated using data on offers actually made to contestants. We find that there is a significant difference between these two functions, and hence we reject the rational expectations hypothesis. However, when a simpler Òrule-of-thumbÓ structure is assumed for the belief function, we find a correspondence to the function obtained from data on actual offers. Our overall conclusion is that contestants are rational to the extent that they make use of all available relevant information, but are not fully rational because they are not processing the information in an optimal way. The importance of belief-formation is confirmed by the estimation of a mixture model which establishes that the vast majority of contestants are forward-looking as opposed to myopic.
Download Info
To download:
If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the
proper application to
view it first. Information about this may be contained
in the File-Format links below. 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.
Publisher Info
Paper provided by Department of Economic and Business Sciences, LUISS Guido Carli in its series Quaderni DPTEA with number
161.
Find related papers by JEL classification: C15 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Econometric and Statistical Methods: General - - - Statistical Simulation Methods C23 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Single Equation Models; Single Variables - - - Models with Panel Data C25 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Single Equation Models; Single Variables - - - Discrete Regression and Qualitative Choice Models D81 - Microeconomics - - Information, Knowledge, and Uncertainty - - - Criteria for Decision-Making under Risk and Uncertainty
This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:
References listed on IDEAS Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:
Glenn W. Harrison & John A. List, 2004.
"Field Experiments,"
Journal of Economic Literature,
American Economic Association, vol. 42(4), pages 1009-1055, December.
[Downloadable!] (restricted)
repec:bep:eapadv:v:8:y:2008:i:1:p:1798-1798 is not listed on IDEAS
Other versions:
Fabrizio Botti & Anna Conte & Daniela T. Di Cagno & Carlo D'Ippoliti, .
"Risk attitude in real decision proBLEMs,"
Quaderni DPTEA
144, Department of Economic and Business Sciences, LUISS Guido Carli.
[Downloadable!]