IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/
MyIDEAS: Login to save this article or follow this journal

Ambiguity aversion, higher-order risk attitude and optimal effort

  • Huang, Rachel J.

In this paper, we examine whether a more ambiguity-averse individual will invest in more effort to shift her initial starting wealth distribution toward a better target distribution. We assume that the individual has ambiguous beliefs regarding two target (starting) distributions and that one distribution is preferred to the other. We find that an increase in ambiguity aversion will decrease (increase) the optimal effort when the cost of effort is non-monetary. When the cost of effort is monetary, the effect depends on whether the individual would make more effort when the target (starting) distribution is the preferred distribution than the target (starting) distributions, the inferior one. We further characterize the individual’s higher-order risk preferences to examine the sufficient conditions.

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://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0167668712000030
Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to look for a different version under "Related research" (further below) or search for a different version of it.

Article provided by Elsevier in its journal Insurance: Mathematics and Economics.

Volume (Year): 50 (2012)
Issue (Month): 3 ()
Pages: 338-345

as
in new window

Handle: RePEc:eee:insuma:v:50:y:2012:i:3:p:338-345
Contact details of provider: Web page: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/inca/505554

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. Peter Klibanoff & Massimo Marinacci & Sujoy Mukerji, 2005. "A Smooth Model of Decision Making under Ambiguity," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 73(6), pages 1849-1892, November.
  2. Kaïs Dachraoui & Georges Dionne & Louis Eeckhoudt & Philippe Godfroid, 2004. "Comparative Mixed Risk Aversion: Definition and Application to Self-Protection and Willingness to Pay," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 29(3), pages 261-276, December.
  3. Jullien, B. & Salanie, B. & Salanie, F., 1998. "Should More Risk-Averse Agents Exert More Effort?," Papers 98.489, Toulouse - GREMAQ.
  4. Einhorn, Hillel J & Hogarth, Robin M, 1986. "Decision Making under Ambiguity," The Journal of Business, University of Chicago Press, vol. 59(4), pages S225-50, October.
  5. Ehrlich, Isaac & Becker, Gary S, 1972. "Market Insurance, Self-Insurance, and Self-Protection," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 80(4), pages 623-48, July-Aug..
  6. Dionne, G. & Eeckhoudt, L., 1984. "Self-Insurance, Self-Protection and Increased Risk Aversion," Cahiers de recherche 8424, Universite de Montreal, Departement de sciences economiques.
  7. Arthur Snow, 2010. "Ambiguity and the value of information," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 40(2), pages 133-145, April.
  8. Harrell Chesson & W. Viscusi, 2003. "Commonalities in Time and Ambiguity Aversion for Long-Term Risks ," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 54(1), pages 57-71, February.
  9. Gilboa, Itzhak & Schmeidler, David, 1989. "Maxmin expected utility with non-unique prior," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 18(2), pages 141-153, April.
  10. Chiu, W.Henry, 2005. "Degree of downside risk aversion and self-protection," Insurance: Mathematics and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 36(1), pages 93-101, February.
  11. Yoram Halevy, 2007. "Ellsberg Revisited: An Experimental Study," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 75(2), pages 503-536, 03.
  12. Caballe, Jordi & Pomansky, Alexey, 1996. "Mixed Risk Aversion," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 71(2), pages 485-513, November.
  13. Rakesh K. Sarin & Martin Weber, 1993. "Effects of Ambiguity in Market Experiments," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 39(5), pages 602-615, May.
  14. Jean, William H, 1984. " The Harmonic Mean and Other Necessary Conditions for Stochastic Dominance," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 39(2), pages 527-34, June.
  15. Arthur Snow, 2011. "Ambiguity aversion and the propensities for self-insurance and self-protection," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 42(1), pages 27-43, February.
  16. Jindapon, Paan & Neilson, William S., 2007. "Higher-order generalizations of Arrow-Pratt and Ross risk aversion: A comparative statics approach," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 136(1), pages 719-728, September.
  17. Ekern, Steinar, 1980. "Increasing Nth degree risk," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 6(4), pages 329-333.
  18. Camerer, Colin & Weber, Martin, 1992. " Recent Developments in Modeling Preferences: Uncertainty and Ambiguity," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 5(4), pages 325-70, October.
  19. Chuang, O-Chia & Eeckhoudt, Louis & Huang, Rachel J. & Tzeng, Larry Y., 2013. "Risky targets and effort," Insurance: Mathematics and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 52(3), pages 465-468.
  20. Chow, Clare Chua & Sarin, Rakesh K, 2001. " Comparative Ignorance and the Ellsberg Paradox," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 22(2), pages 129-39, March.
  21. Eric Briys & Harris Schlesinger & J.-Matthias Graf v. d. Schulenburg, 1991. "Reliability of Risk Management: Market Insurance, Self-Insurance and Self-Protection Reconsidered," The Geneva Risk and Insurance Review, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 16(1), pages 45-58, June.
  22. Jean, William H, 1980. " The Geometric Mean and Stochastic Dominance," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 35(1), pages 151-58, March.
Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

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

When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:insuma:v:50:y:2012:i:3:p:338-345. 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: (Zhang, Lei)

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.

This information is provided to you by IDEAS at the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis using RePEc data.