IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/jeborg/v185y2021icp390-401.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

2D:4D does not predict economic preferences: Evidence from a large, representative sample

Author

Listed:
  • Neyse, Levent
  • Johannesson, Magnus
  • Dreber, Anna

Abstract

The digit ratio (2D:4D) is considered a proxy for testosterone exposure in utero, and there has been a recent surge of studies testing whether 2D:4D is associated with economic preferences. Although the results are not conclusive, previous studies have reported statistically significant correlations between 2D:4D and risk taking, altruism, positive reciprocity, negative reciprocity and trust. However, most previous studies have small sample sizes gathered from university students and there is also no consensus on the type of analysis (e.g., which hand to analyze or subgroup to focus on) or the preference elicitation method. We present results from a pre-registered large sample study testing if 2D:4D is associated with economic preferences. Data were collected in a representative sample of adults in the German Socioeconomic Panel-Innovation Sample (SOEP-IS), in a sample of about 3450 respondents (about 5 times larger than the previously largest study in this field). Using experimentally validated survey questions, we find no statistically significant association between 2D:4D and economic preferences in the largest study to this date on the topic.

Suggested Citation

  • Neyse, Levent & Johannesson, Magnus & Dreber, Anna, 2021. "2D:4D does not predict economic preferences: Evidence from a large, representative sample," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 185(C), pages 390-401.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:jeborg:v:185:y:2021:i:c:p:390-401
    DOI: 10.1016/j.jebo.2021.02.029
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0167268121000962
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.jebo.2021.02.029?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
    ---><---

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

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. repec:dgr:uvatin:20110046 is not listed on IDEAS
    2. 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.
    3. Pablo Brañas-Garza & Jaromír Kovářík & Levent Neyse, 2013. "Second-to-Fourth Digit Ratio Has a Non-Monotonic Impact on Altruism," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 8(4), pages 1-10, April.
    4. Levent Neyse & Ferdinand M. Vieider & Patrick Ring & Catharina Probst & Christian Kaernbach & Thilo Eimeren & Ulrich Schmidt, 2020. "Risk attitudes and digit ratio (2D:4D): Evidence from prospect theory," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 60(1), pages 29-51, February.
    5. Boris van Leeuwen & Paul Smeets & Jeanne Bovet & Gideon Nave & Jonathan Stieglitz & Andrew Whitehouse, 2020. "Do sex hormones at birth predict later-life economic preferences? Evidence from a pregnancy birth cohort study," Post-Print hal-03121949, HAL.
    6. Galizzi, Matteo M. & Nieboer, Jeroen, 2015. "Digit ratio (2D:4D) and altruism: evidence from a large, multi-ethnic sample," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 60982, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    7. Diego Aycinena & Rimvydas Baltaduonis & Lucas Rentschler, 2014. "Risk Preferences and Prenatal Exposure to Sex Hormones for Ladinos," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 9(8), pages 1-10, August.
    8. Buser, Thomas, 2012. "Digit ratios, the menstrual cycle and social preferences," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 76(2), pages 457-470.
    9. Neyse, Levent & Bosworth, Steven & Ring, Patrick & Schmidt, Ulrich, 2016. "Overconfidence, Incentives and Digit Ratio," Open Access Publications from Kiel Institute for the World Economy 130145, Kiel Institute for the World Economy (IfW Kiel).
    10. Armin Falk & Anke Becker & Thomas Dohmen & Benjamin Enke & David B. Huffman & Uwe Sunde, 2017. "Global Evidence on Economic Preferences," NBER Working Papers 23943, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    11. Pablo Brañas‐Garza & Matteo M. Galizzi & Jeroen Nieboer, 2018. "Experimental And Self‐Reported Measures Of Risk Taking And Digit Ratio (2d:4d): Evidence From A Large, Systematic Study," International Economic Review, Department of Economics, University of Pennsylvania and Osaka University Institute of Social and Economic Research Association, vol. 59(3), pages 1131-1157, August.
    12. Armin Falk & Anke Becker & Thomas Dohmen & Benjamin Enke & David Huffman & Uwe Sunde, 2018. "Global Evidence on Economic Preferences," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 133(4), pages 1645-1692.
    13. Schipper, Burkhard C., 2023. "Sex hormones and choice under risk," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 96(C).
    14. David Richter & Jürgen Schupp, 2015. "The SOEP Innovation Sample (SOEP IS)," Schmollers Jahrbuch : Journal of Applied Social Science Studies / Zeitschrift für Wirtschafts- und Sozialwissenschaften, Duncker & Humblot, Berlin, vol. 135(3), pages 389-400.
    15. Ellen Garbarino & Robert Slonim & Justin Sydnor, 2011. "Digit ratios (2D:4D) as predictors of risky decision making for both sexes," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 42(1), pages 1-26, February.
    16. Rachel Croson & Uri Gneezy, 2009. "Gender Differences in Preferences," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 47(2), pages 448-474, June.
    17. Uri Gneezy & Kenneth L. Leonard & John A. List, 2009. "Gender Differences in Competition: Evidence From a Matrilineal and a Patriarchal Society," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 77(5), pages 1637-1664, September.
    18. Jack van Honk & Estrella R. Montoya & Peter A. Bos & Mark van Vugt & David Terburg, 2012. "New evidence on testosterone and cooperation," Nature, Nature, vol. 485(7399), pages 4-5, May.
    19. Elle Parslow & Eva Ranehill & Niklas Zethraeus & Liselott Blomberg & Bo Schoultz & Angelica Lindén Hirschberg & Magnus Johannesson & Anna Dreber, 2019. "The digit ratio (2D:4D) and economic preferences: no robust associations in a sample of 330 women," Journal of the Economic Science Association, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 5(2), pages 149-169, December.
    20. Goebel Jan & Grabka Markus M. & Liebig Stefan & Kroh Martin & Richter David & Schröder Carsten & Schupp Jürgen, 2019. "The German Socio-Economic Panel (SOEP)," Journal of Economics and Statistics (Jahrbuecher fuer Nationaloekonomie und Statistik), De Gruyter, vol. 239(2), pages 345-360, April.
    21. Richard H. Thaler & Eric J. Johnson, 1990. "Gambling with the House Money and Trying to Break Even: The Effects of Prior Outcomes on Risky Choice," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 36(6), pages 643-660, June.
    22. Werner Bönte & Vivien D. Procher & Diemo Urbig, 2016. "Biology and Selection into Entrepreneurship—The Relevance of Prenatal Testosterone Exposure," Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, , vol. 40(5), pages 1121-1148, September.
    23. Burkhard Schipper, 2012. "Sex Hormones and Choice under Risk," Working Papers 127, University of California, Davis, Department of Economics.
    24. repec:wly:soecon:v:82:1:y:2015:p:235-256 is not listed on IDEAS
    25. Lima de Miranda, Katharina & Neyse, Levent & Schmidt, Ulrich, 2018. "Risk Preferences and Predictions about Others: No Association with 2D:4D Ratio," Open Access Publications from Kiel Institute for the World Economy 230949, Kiel Institute for the World Economy (IfW Kiel).
    26. Pablo Brañas‐Garza & Matteo M. Galizzi & Jeroen Nieboer, 2018. "Experimental And Self‐Reported Measures Of Risk Taking And Digit Ratio (2d:4d): Evidence From A Large, Systematic Study," International Economic Review, Department of Economics, University of Pennsylvania and Osaka University Institute of Social and Economic Research Association, vol. 59(3), pages 1131-1157, August.
    27. Pablo Brañas-Garza & Aldo Rustichini, 2011. "Organizing Effects of Testosterone and Economic Behavior: Not Just Risk Taking," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 6(12), pages 1-8, December.
    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. Neyse, Levent & Fossen, Frank M. & Johannesson, Magnus & Dreber, Anna, 2023. "Cognitive reflection and 2D:4D: Evidence from a large population sample," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 209(C), pages 288-307.
    2. Fossen, Frank M. & Neyse, Levent & Johannesson, Magnus & Dreber Almenberg, Anna, 2020. "2D:4D and Self-Employment Using SOEP Data: A Replication Study," IZA Discussion Papers 13180, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    3. Brañas-Garza, Pablo & Chowdhury, Subhasish M. & Espín, Antonio M. & Nieboer, Jeroen, 2023. "‘Born this Way’? Prenatal exposure to testosterone may determine behavior in competition and conflict," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 96(C).
    4. Fossen, Frank M. & Neyse, Levent & Johannesson, Magnus & Dreber, Anna, 2022. "2D:4D and Self-Employment: A Preregistered Replication Study in a Large General Population Sample," EconStor Open Access Articles and Book Chapters, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics, vol. 46(1), pages 21-43.
    5. Schipper, Burkhard C., 2023. "Sex hormones and choice under risk," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 96(C).
    6. Silvan Has & Jake Anders & John Jerrim & Nikki Shure, 2021. "Educational expectations of UK teenagers and the role of socio-economic status and economic preferences," CEPEO Working Paper Series 21-11, UCL Centre for Education Policy and Equalising Opportunities, revised Dec 2021.
    7. Fischbacher, Urs & Neyse, Levent & Richter, David & Schröder, Carsten, 2022. "Adding household surveys to the behavioral economics toolbox: Insights from the SOEP Innovation Sample," Discussion Papers, Research Unit: Market Behavior SP II 2022-201, WZB Berlin Social Science Center.
    8. Thomas Meissner & Xavier Gassmann & Corinne Faure & Joachim Schleich, 2023. "Individual characteristics associated with risk and time preferences: A multi country representative survey," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 66(1), pages 77-107, February.
    9. Feine, Gregor & Groh, Elke D. & von Loessl, Victor & Wetzel, Heike, 2023. "The double dividend of social information in charitable giving: Evidence from a framed field experiment," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 103(C).
    10. Finley, Brian & Kalwij, Adriaan & Kapteyn, Arie, 2022. "Born to be wild: Second-to-fourth digit length ratio and risk preferences," Economics & Human Biology, Elsevier, vol. 47(C).

    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. Elle Parslow & Eva Ranehill & Niklas Zethraeus & Liselott Blomberg & Bo Schoultz & Angelica Lindén Hirschberg & Magnus Johannesson & Anna Dreber, 2019. "The digit ratio (2D:4D) and economic preferences: no robust associations in a sample of 330 women," Journal of the Economic Science Association, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 5(2), pages 149-169, December.
    2. Finley, Brian & Kalwij, Adriaan & Kapteyn, Arie, 2022. "Born to be wild: Second-to-fourth digit length ratio and risk preferences," Economics & Human Biology, Elsevier, vol. 47(C).
    3. Schipper, Burkhard C., 2023. "Sex hormones and choice under risk," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 96(C).
    4. Brañas-Garza, Pablo & Chowdhury, Subhasish M. & Espín, Antonio M. & Nieboer, Jeroen, 2023. "‘Born this Way’? Prenatal exposure to testosterone may determine behavior in competition and conflict," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 96(C).
    5. Neyse, Levent & Vieider, Ferdinand M. & Ring, Patrick & Probst, Catharina & Kaernbach, Christian & Eimeren, Thilo van & Schmidt, Ulrich, 2020. "Risk attitudes and digit ratio (2D:4D): Evidence from prospect theory," EconStor Open Access Articles and Book Chapters, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics, issue 60, pages 29-51.
    6. Judit Alonso & Roberto Di Paolo & Giovanni Ponti & Marcello Sartarelli, 2017. "Some (Mis)facts about 2D:4D, Preferences and Personality," Working Papers. Serie AD 2017-08, Instituto Valenciano de Investigaciones Económicas, S.A. (Ivie).
    7. Brañas-Garza, Pablo & Espín, Antonio M. & Garcia, Teresa & Kovářík, Jaromír, 2018. "Digit ratio (2D:4D) predicts pro-social behavior in economic games only for unsatisfied individuals," MPRA Paper 86166, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    8. Werner Bönte & Vivien D. Procher & Diemo Urbig, 2016. "Biology and Selection into Entrepreneurship—The Relevance of Prenatal Testosterone Exposure," Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, , vol. 40(5), pages 1121-1148, September.
    9. Pablo Brañas‐Garza & Matteo M. Galizzi & Jeroen Nieboer, 2018. "Experimental And Self‐Reported Measures Of Risk Taking And Digit Ratio (2d:4d): Evidence From A Large, Systematic Study," International Economic Review, Department of Economics, University of Pennsylvania and Osaka University Institute of Social and Economic Research Association, vol. 59(3), pages 1131-1157, August.
    10. Sergio Da Silva & Bruno Moreira & Newton Da Costa Jr, 2015. "Handedness and digit ratio predict overconfidence in cognitive and motor skill tasks in a sample of preschoolers," Economics Bulletin, AccessEcon, vol. 35(2), pages 1087-1097.
    11. Galizzi, Matteo M. & Nieboer, Jeroen, 2015. "Digit ratio (2D:4D) and altruism: evidence from a large, multi-ethnic sample," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 60982, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    12. Neyse, Levent & Friedl, Andreas & Schmidt, Ulrich, 2014. "Payment Scheme Changes and Effort Provision: The Effect of Digit Ratio," MPRA Paper 59549, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    13. Andreas C. Drichoutis & Rodolfo M. Nayga, 2015. "Do risk and time preferences have biological roots?," Southern Economic Journal, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 82(1), pages 235-256, July.
    14. Eber, Nicolas & François, Abel & Weill, Laurent, 2021. "Gender, age, and attitude toward competition," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 192(C), pages 668-690.
    15. Thomas Buser & Anna Dreber & Johanna Mollerstrom, 2015. "Stress Reactions cannot explain the Gender Gap in Willingness to compete," Tinbergen Institute Discussion Papers 15-059/I, Tinbergen Institute.
    16. Thomas Buser & Anna Dreber & Johanna Mollerstrom, 2017. "The impact of stress on tournament entry," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 20(2), pages 506-530, June.
    17. Boschini, Anne & Dreber, Anna & von Essen, Emma & Muren, Astri & Ranehill, Eva, 2019. "Gender, risk preferences and willingness to compete in a random sample of the Swedish population✰," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 83(C).
    18. Filippin, Antonio & Crosetto, Paolo, 2014. "A Reconsideration of Gender Differences in Risk Attitudes," IZA Discussion Papers 8184, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    19. Lima de Miranda, Katharina & Neyse, Levent & Schmidt, Ulrich, 2018. "Risk Preferences and Predictions about Others: No Association with 2D:4D Ratio," Open Access Publications from Kiel Institute for the World Economy 230949, Kiel Institute for the World Economy (IfW Kiel).
    20. Harry Pickard & Thomas Dohmen & Bert Van Landeghem, 2022. "Inequality and risk preference," Working Papers 2022022, The University of Sheffield, Department of Economics.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Economic behavior; Prenatal hormones; Testosterone; Digit ratio;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • D03 - Microeconomics - - General - - - Behavioral Microeconomics: Underlying Principles
    • D87 - Microeconomics - - Information, Knowledge, and Uncertainty - - - Neuroeconomics
    • D9 - Microeconomics - - Micro-Based Behavioral Economics

    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:eee:jeborg:v:185:y:2021:i:c:p:390-401. 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/jebo .

    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.