Advanced Search
MyIDEAS: Login to save this paper or follow this series

The biological basis of expected utility anomalies

Contents:

Author Info

  • Matsushita, Raul
  • Baldo, Dinorá
  • Martin, Bruna
  • Da Silva, Sergio

Abstract

We assess the biological basis of expected utility anomalies through an experiment of the Allais paradox. A questionnaire study of 120 subjects replicates the anomalies and further gathers information about the respondents’ bio-characteristics, such as gender, age, parenthood, handedness, second to fourth digit ratio, current emotional state, past negative experiences, and religiousness. We find that some of those bio-characteristics matter for the anomalies.

Download Info

If 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.
File URL: http://mpra.ub.uni-muenchen.de/4520/
File Function: original version
Download Restriction: no

Bibliographic Info

Paper provided by University Library of Munich, Germany in its series MPRA Paper with number 4520.

as in new window
Length:
Date of creation: 17 Aug 2007
Date of revision:
Handle: RePEc:pra:mprapa:4520

Contact details of provider:
Postal: Schackstr. 4, D-80539 Munich, Germany
Phone: +49-(0)89-2180-2219
Fax: +49-(0)89-2180-3900
Web page: http://mpra.ub.uni-muenchen.de
More information through EDIRC

Related research

Keywords: expected utility anomalies; risky choice; Allais paradox; experimental economics;

Find related papers by JEL classification:

This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

References

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.:
as in new window
  1. Newton Da Costa & Carlos Mineto & Sergio Da Silva, 2008. "Disposition effect and gender," Applied Economics Letters, Taylor & Francis Journals, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 15(6), pages 411-416.
  2. John Donohue & Steven Levitt, 2000. "The Impact of Legalized Abortion on Crime," NBER Working Papers 8004, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
  3. Machina, Mark J, 1982. ""Expected Utility" Analysis without the Independence Axiom," Econometrica, Econometric Society, Econometric Society, vol. 50(2), pages 277-323, March.
  4. Lewellen, Wilbur G & Lease, Ronald C & Schlarbaum, Gary G, 1977. "Patterns of Investment Strategy and Behavior among Individual Investors," The Journal of Business, University of Chicago Press, University of Chicago Press, vol. 50(3), pages 296-333, July.
  5. Kahneman, Daniel & Tversky, Amos, 1979. "Prospect Theory: An Analysis of Decision under Risk," Econometrica, Econometric Society, Econometric Society, vol. 47(2), pages 263-91, March.
  6. Quiggin, John, 1982. "A theory of anticipated utility," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, Elsevier, vol. 3(4), pages 323-343, December.
  7. Catherine C. Eckel & Philip J. Grossman, 2008. "Sex and Risk: Experimental Evidence," Development Research Unit Working Paper Series, Monash University, Department of Economics archive-09, Monash University, Department of Economics.
  8. Tversky, Amos & Kahneman, Daniel, 1992. " Advances in Prospect Theory: Cumulative Representation of Uncertainty," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, Springer, vol. 5(4), pages 297-323, October.
  9. Jianakoplos, Nancy Ammon & Bernasek, Alexandra, 1998. "Are Women More Risk Averse?," Economic Inquiry, Western Economic Association International, Western Economic Association International, vol. 36(4), pages 620-30, October.
  10. Gneezy, U. & Potters, J.J.M., 1997. "An experiment on risk taking and evaluation periods," Open Access publications from Tilburg University urn:nbn:nl:ui:12-73908, Tilburg University.
  11. Rustichini, Aldo & Dickhaut, John & Ghirardato, Paolo & Smith, Kip & Pardo, Jose V., 2005. "A brain imaging study of the choice procedure," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, Elsevier, vol. 52(2), pages 257-282, August.
  12. McCabe, Kevin & Houser, Daniel & Ryan, Lee & Smith, Vernon & Trouard, Ted, 2001. "A Functional Imaging Study of Cooperation in Two-Person reciprocal Exchange," MPRA Paper 5172, University Library of Munich, Germany.
  13. Sunden, Annika E & Surette, Brian J, 1998. "Gender Differences in the Allocation of Assets in Retirement Savings Plans," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, American Economic Association, vol. 88(2), pages 207-11, May.
  14. Phillip B. Levine & Douglas Staiger & Thomas J. Kane & David J. Zimmerman, 1996. "Roe v. Wade and American Fertility," NBER Working Papers 5615, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
  15. Bechara, Antoine & Damasio, Antonio R., 2005. "The somatic marker hypothesis: A neural theory of economic decision," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, Elsevier, vol. 52(2), pages 336-372, August.
  16. Laurence R. Iannaccone, 1998. "Introduction to the Economics of Religion," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 36(3), pages 1465-1495, September.
  17. Battalio, Raymond C & Kagel, John H & Jiranyakul, Komain, 1990. " Testing between Alternative Models of Choice under Uncertainty: Some Initial Results," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, Springer, vol. 3(1), pages 25-50, March.
  18. Colin Camerer & George Loewenstein & Drazen Prelec, 2003. "Neuroeconomics: How neuroscience can inform economics," Levine's Bibliography 506439000000000484, UCLA Department of Economics.
  19. William S. Comanor & Llad Phillips, 2002. "The Impact of Income and Family Structure on Delinquency," Journal of Applied Economics, Universidad del CEMA, vol. 0, pages 209-232, November.
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 in new window

Cited by:
  1. Wozniak, David, 2009. "Choices About Competition: Differences by gender and hormonal fluctuations, and the role of relative performance feedback," MPRA Paper 21097, University Library of Munich, Germany.

Lists

This item is not listed on Wikipedia, on a reading list or among the top items on IDEAS.

Statistics

Access and download statistics

Corrections

When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:pra:mprapa:4520. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Ekkehart Schlicht).

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 references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.

If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link 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 profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.