IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/pra/mprapa/39987.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Gender bias in risk aversion: evidence from multiple choice exams

Author

Listed:
  • Marín, Carmen
  • Rosa-García, Alfonso

Abstract

We provide evidence on a gender bias in risk aversion among students of economics in Spain. In a sample of 1947 multiple choice exams with penalization for errors, we find that women consistently answer less questions, while differences in marks are not significant. These empirical results are consistent with a recent theoretical prediction of the effect of risk aversion in test exams. This finding shows that women can suffer a disadvantage with this kind of exams widely used in education.

Suggested Citation

  • Marín, Carmen & Rosa-García, Alfonso, 2011. "Gender bias in risk aversion: evidence from multiple choice exams," MPRA Paper 39987, University Library of Munich, Germany.
  • Handle: RePEc:pra:mprapa:39987
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://mpra.ub.uni-muenchen.de/39987/1/MPRA_paper_39987.pdf
    File Function: original version
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. repec:ebl:ecbull:v:4:y:2004:i:4:p:1-10 is not listed on IDEAS
    2. Rachel Croson & Uri Gneezy, 2009. "Gender Differences in Preferences," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 47(2), pages 448-474, June.
    3. Albert Burgos, 2004. "Guessing and gambling," Economics Bulletin, AccessEcon, vol. 4(4), pages 1-10.
    4. Charles Ballard & Marianne Johnson, 2005. "Gender, Expectations, And Grades In Introductory Microeconomics At A Us University," Feminist Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 11(1), pages 95-122.
    Full references (including those not matched with items 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. MARÍN MARTÍNEZ, Carmen & ROSA GARCÍA, Alfonso, 2014. "Is Gender Bias A Cost Of Failure Issue?," Regional and Sectoral Economic Studies, Euro-American Association of Economic Development, vol. 14(3), pages 19-30.
    2. Pelin Akyol & James Key & Kala Krishna, 2022. "Hit or Miss? Test Taking Behavior in Multiple Choice Exams," Annals of Economics and Statistics, GENES, issue 147, pages 3-50.
    3. Hubert Janos Kiss & Adrienn Selei, 2013. "Gambler's fallacy in the classroom?," CERS-IE WORKING PAPERS 1342, Institute of Economics, Centre for Economic and Regional Studies.
    4. Ertac, Seda & Gumren, Mert & Gurdal, Mehmet Y., 2020. "Demand for decision autonomy and the desire to avoid responsibility in risky environments: Experimental evidence," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 77(C).
    5. Owen, Ann L. & Temesvary, Judit, 2018. "The performance effects of gender diversity on bank boards," Journal of Banking & Finance, Elsevier, vol. 90(C), pages 50-63.
    6. Peter John Robinson & W.J.W. Botzen & F. Zhou, 2019. "An experimental study of charity hazard: The effect of risky and ambiguous government compensation on flood insurance demand," Working Papers 19-19, Utrecht School of Economics.
    7. Becchetti, Leonardo & Degli Antoni, Giacomo & Ottone, Stefania & Solferino, Nazaria, 2013. "Allocation criteria under task performance: The gendered preference for protection," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 45(C), pages 96-111.
    8. Marco Caliendo & Frank M. Fossen & Alexander Kritikos & Miriam Wetter, 2015. "The Gender Gap in Entrepreneurship: Not just a Matter of Personality," CESifo Economic Studies, CESifo Group, vol. 61(1), pages 202-238.
    9. José de Sousa & Guillaume Hollard, 2021. "From Micro to Macro Gender Differences: Evidence from Field Tournaments," Post-Print hal-03389151, HAL.
    10. Gary Bolton & Eugen Dimant & Ulrich Schmidt, 2018. "When a Nudge Backfires. Using Observation with Social and Economic Incentives to Promote Pro-Social Behavior," PPE Working Papers 0017, Philosophy, Politics and Economics, University of Pennsylvania.
    11. Bjorvatn, Kjetil & Falch, Ranveig & Hernæs, Ulrikke, 2016. "Gender, context and competition: Experimental evidence from rural and urban Uganda," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 61(C), pages 31-37.
    12. Kerri Brick & Martine Visser & Justine Burns, 2012. "Risk Aversion: Experimental Evidence from South African Fishing Communities," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 94(1), pages 133-152.
    13. Matteo Migheli, 2021. "Green purchasing: the effect of parenthood and gender," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 23(7), pages 10576-10600, July.
    14. Dreber, Anna & Heikensten, Emma & Säve-Söderbergh, Jenny, 2022. "Why do women ask for less?," Labour Economics, Elsevier, vol. 78(C).
    15. Alger, Ingela, 2021. "On the evolution of male competitiveness," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 190(C), pages 228-254.
    16. Girardone, Claudia & Kokas, Sotirios & Wood, Geoffrey, 2021. "Diversity and women in finance: Challenges and future perspectives," Journal of Corporate Finance, Elsevier, vol. 71(C).
    17. van de Walle, Dominique, 2011. "Lasting welfare effects of widowhood in a poor country," Policy Research Working Paper Series 5734, The World Bank.
    18. Friedrich Heinemann & Martin Kocher, 2013. "Tax compliance under tax regime changes," International Tax and Public Finance, Springer;International Institute of Public Finance, vol. 20(2), pages 225-246, April.
    19. Oznur Ozdamar & Eleftherios Giovanis & Sahizer Samuk, 2020. "State business relations and the dynamics of job flows in Egypt and Turkey," Eurasian Business Review, Springer;Eurasia Business and Economics Society, vol. 10(4), pages 519-558, December.
    20. Astrid Dannenberg & Carlo Gallier, 2020. "The choice of institutions to solve cooperation problems: a survey of experimental research," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 23(3), pages 716-749, September.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    gender differences; risk aversion; multiple choice;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • A22 - General Economics and Teaching - - Economic Education and Teaching of Economics - - - Undergraduate
    • I21 - Health, Education, and Welfare - - Education - - - Analysis of Education
    • J16 - Labor and Demographic Economics - - Demographic Economics - - - Economics of Gender; Non-labor Discrimination

    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:pra:mprapa:39987. 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: Joachim Winter (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/vfmunde.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.