IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/ecolet/v113y2011i1p62-64.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

A note on representativeness and household finance

Author

Listed:
  • Dierkes, Maik
  • Klos, Alexander
  • Langer, Thomas

Abstract

Previous research has shown that social households have a higher probability of owning risky assets. Using a representative sample of the German population, we demonstrate that the sociability effect is much stronger among people younger than 50.

Suggested Citation

  • Dierkes, Maik & Klos, Alexander & Langer, Thomas, 2011. "A note on representativeness and household finance," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 113(1), pages 62-64, October.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:ecolet:v:113:y:2011:i:1:p:62-64
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0165176511002229
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Thomas Dohmen & Armin Falk & David Huffman & Uwe Sunde & Jürgen Schupp & Gert G. Wagner, 2011. "Individual Risk Attitudes: Measurement, Determinants, And Behavioral Consequences," Journal of the European Economic Association, European Economic Association, vol. 9(3), pages 522-550, June.
    2. repec:bla:jfinan:v:59:y:2004:i:1:p:137-163 is not listed on IDEAS
    3. Jeffrey R. Brown & Zoran Ivković & Paul A. Smith & Scott Weisbenner, 2008. "Neighbors Matter: Causal Community Effects and Stock Market Participation," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 63(3), pages 1509-1531, June.
    4. Steven D. Levitt & John A. List, 2007. "What Do Laboratory Experiments Measuring Social Preferences Reveal About the Real World?," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 21(2), pages 153-174, Spring.
    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


    Cited by:

    1. Luik, Marc-André & Berlemann, Michael, 2014. "Institutional Reform and Depositors’ Portfolio Choice: Evidence from Censored Quantile Regressions," VfS Annual Conference 2014 (Hamburg): Evidence-based Economic Policy 100291, Verein für Socialpolitik / German Economic Association.
    2. Becker, Gideon, 2014. "The portfolio structure of German households: A multinomial fractional response approach with unobserved heterogeneity," University of Tübingen Working Papers in Business and Economics 74, University of Tuebingen, Faculty of Economics and Social Sciences, School of Business and Economics.
    3. Becker, Gideon & Dimpfl, Thomas, 2014. "Labor income risk and the reluctance of fouseholds to invest in risky financial assets: A panel data analysis," University of Tübingen Working Papers in Business and Economics 72, University of Tuebingen, Faculty of Economics and Social Sciences, School of Business and Economics.

    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. Reto Foellmi & Stefan Legge & Lukas Schmid, 2016. "Do Professionals Get It Right? Limited Attention and Risk‐taking Behaviour," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 0(592), pages 724-755, May.
    2. Kerschbamer, Rudolf & Müller, Daniel, 2020. "Social preferences and political attitudes: An online experiment on a large heterogeneous sample," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 182(C).
    3. Leonhard K. Lades & Kate Laffan & Till O. Weber, 2020. "Do economic preferences predict pro-environmental behaviour?," Working Papers 202003, Geary Institute, University College Dublin.
    4. Mario A. Maggioni & Domenico Rossignoli, 2021. "If it Looks like a Human and Speaks like a Human..," DISEIS - Quaderni del Dipartimento di Economia internazionale, delle istituzioni e dello sviluppo dis2101, Università Cattolica del Sacro Cuore, Dipartimento di Economia internazionale, delle istituzioni e dello sviluppo (DISEIS).
    5. Jennifer Alonso Garcia & Hazel Bateman & Johan Bonekamp & Ralph Stevens, 2017. "Retirement drawdown defaults: the role of implied endorsement," ULB Institutional Repository 2013/300025, ULB -- Universite Libre de Bruxelles.
    6. Giamattei, Marcus & Lambsdorff, Johann Graf, 2019. "classEx — an online tool for lab-in-the-field experiments with smartphones," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Finance, Elsevier, vol. 22(C), pages 223-231.
    7. Håkan J. Holm & Victor Nee & Sonja Opper, 2020. "Strategic decisions: behavioral differences between CEOs and others," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 23(1), pages 154-180, March.
    8. Naranjo, Maria A. & Alpízar, Francisco & Martinsson, Peter, 2019. "Alternatives for Risk Elicitation in the Field: Evidence from Coffee Farmers in Costa Rica," EfD Discussion Paper 19-21, Environment for Development, University of Gothenburg.
    9. Fossen, Frank M. & Glocker, Daniela, 2017. "Stated and revealed heterogeneous risk preferences in educational choice," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 97(C), pages 1-25.
    10. Mario A. Maggioni & Domenico Rossignoli, 2021. "If it Looks like a Human and Speaks like a Human ... Dialogue and cooperation in human-robot interactions," Papers 2104.11652, arXiv.org, revised May 2021.
    11. Pace, Noemi & Daidone, Silvio, 2024. "Impact of development interventions on individual risk preferences: Evidence from a field-lab experiment and survey data," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 111(C).
    12. Gary Charness & Thomas Garcia & Theo Offerman & Marie Claire Villeval, 2020. "Do measures of risk attitude in the laboratory predict behavior under risk in and outside of the laboratory?," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 60(2), pages 99-123, April.
    13. Mark J. Browne & Annette Hofmann & Andreas Richter & Sophie-Madeleine Roth & Petra Steinorth, 2021. "Peer effects in risk preferences: Evidence from Germany," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 299(1), pages 1129-1163, April.
    14. Florian Zimmermann, 2015. "Clumped or Piecewise? Evidence on Preferences for Information," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 61(4), pages 740-753, April.
    15. Jennifer Alonso‐García & Hazel Bateman & Johan Bonekamp & Ralph Stevens, 2021. "Spending from Regulated Retirement Drawdowns: The Role of Implied Endorsement," Scandinavian Journal of Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 123(3), pages 810-847, July.
    16. Zhixin Dai & Fabio Galeotti & Marie Claire Villeval, 2018. "Cheating in the Lab Predicts Fraud in the Field: An Experiment in Public Transportation," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 64(3), pages 1081-1100, March.
    17. Dohmen, Thomas, 2014. "Behavioral labor economics: Advances and future directions," Labour Economics, Elsevier, vol. 30(C), pages 71-85.
    18. Jean-Louis Bago & Bruce Shearer, 2022. "Risk preferences and contract choices," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 25(5), pages 1374-1398, November.
    19. Ihli, Hanna Julia & Chiputwa, Brian & Musshoff, Oliver, 2013. "Do Changing Probabilities or Payoffs in Lottery-Choice Experiments Matter? Evidence from Rural Uganda," GlobalFood Discussion Papers 158146, Georg-August-Universitaet Goettingen, GlobalFood, Department of Agricultural Economics and Rural Development.
    20. Gill, Andrej & Hett, Florian & Tischer, Johannes, 2022. "Time inconsistency and overdraft use: Evidence from transaction data and behavioral measurement experiments," Discussion Papers 18/2022, Deutsche Bundesbank.

    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:eee:ecolet:v:113:y:2011:i:1:p:62-64. 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: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/ecolet .

    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.