IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/cup/judgdm/v5y2010i3p159-163_3.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Emotional reactions to losing explain gender differences in entering a risky lottery

Author

Listed:
  • Eriksson, Kimmo
  • Simpson, Brent

Abstract

A gender difference in risk preferences, with women being more averse to risky choices, is a robust experimental finding. Speculating on the sources of this difference, Croson and Gneezy recently pointed to the tendency for women to experience emotions more strongly and suggested that feeling more strongly about negative outcomes would lead to greater risk-aversion. Here we test this hypothesis in an international survey with 424 respondents from India and 416 from US where we ask questions about a hypothetical lottery. In both countries we find that emotions about outcomes are stronger among women, and that this effect partially mediates gender difference in willingness to enter the lottery.

Suggested Citation

  • Eriksson, Kimmo & Simpson, Brent, 2010. "Emotional reactions to losing explain gender differences in entering a risky lottery," Judgment and Decision Making, Cambridge University Press, vol. 5(3), pages 159-163, June.
    • Handle: RePEc:cup:judgdm:v:5:y:2010:i:3:p:159-163_3
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.cambridge.org/core/product/identifier/S1930297500001030/type/journal_article
    File Function: link to article abstract page
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    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:cup:judgdm:v:5:y:2010:i:3:p:159-163_3. 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: Kirk Stebbing (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.cambridge.org/jdm .

    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.