IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/bla/socsci/v100y2019i1p140-162.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Loss Aversion and Risk Aversion in Wagering on Jeopardy!’s “Daily Double”

Author

Listed:
  • Curtis M. Simon

Abstract

Objectives The objective of the study was to test predictions of loss aversion and risk aversion by analyzing contestant wagers in the game show Jeopardy! Methods The primary method employed in this article is ordinary least squares regression analysis but the mean wagers of contestants in various player subcategories and stages of the game are also analyzed. Results The results support the core proposition of loss aversion in that the mean wagers of contestants who are behind in the game are greater than are the mean wagers of contestants who are ahead in the game. The results also indicate some differences in the behavior of men and women in risk taking and that contestants make use of frames of reference in making their wagers such as how far ahead or behind they are in points and how much “time” is left in the game at the time of their wager. Conclusion Given the results of this article and a review of other relevant literature, the suggestion is made that future studies of loss aversion and risk aversion continue to explore complexity and variation in the context of decision making and that future research into possible differences by sex in risk aversion explore scenarios in which choices are grounded in other‐ or community‐oriented situations rather than scenarios centering only on individual gains.

Suggested Citation

  • Curtis M. Simon, 2019. "Loss Aversion and Risk Aversion in Wagering on Jeopardy!’s “Daily Double”," Social Science Quarterly, Southwestern Social Science Association, vol. 100(1), pages 140-162, February.
  • Handle: RePEc:bla:socsci:v:100:y:2019:i:1:p:140-162
    DOI: 10.1111/ssqu.12549
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1111/ssqu.12549
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1111/ssqu.12549?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    More about this item

    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:bla:socsci:v:100:y:2019:i:1:p:140-162. 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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.blackwellpublishing.com/journal.asp?ref=0038-4941 .

    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.