IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jrisks/v11y2022i1p2-d1008862.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The Role of Emotions and Knowledge on Preference for Uncertainty: Follow Your Heart but Listen to Your Brain!

Author

Listed:
  • Tânia Saraiva

    (Lisbon Accountings and Business School, ISCAL, ADVANCE/CSG, 1069-035 Lisbon, Portugal)

  • Tiago Cruz Gonçalves

    (ISEG Lisbon School of Economics & Management, University of Lisbon, ADVANCE/CSG, 1200-781 Lisboa, Portugal)

Abstract

This paper analyzes the joint association of emotions and knowledge in decision-making under uncertainty on a TV game show setting. The objective of this research is to understand the impact of emotions and knowledge on the preference for uncertainty (PU), which have mostly been investigated separately in Economics and Psychology until now. We examine the preference for uncertainty, proxied by a preference for gambling against a sure payoff, in 59 contestants in the TV game show “JOKER”. The data used contain individuals’ characteristics, as well as the decisions regarding the game, including the choice to carry on playing or accept a sure payoff, the level of knowledge of the topic, and the emotions experienced by the contestant. The methodology adopted includes a bivariate association between PU and knowledge and emotions, respectively. Additionally, we test a multivariate association using a Classification and Regression Tree (CART) method, which is suited for a complex nonlinear decision process that robustly mimics human decision-making. We find that preference for uncertainty increases when the contestants have a full domain or total absence of knowledge. Our results suggest, also, that emotions are the factor that only determines the preference for uncertainty when contestants have a restricted level of knowledge. Our results are robust across different proxies for knowledge and emotions and for different methodological thresholds. Results matter for investors, regulators, and policymakers, since it provides novel insights about the relative impact of knowledge and emotional status on risk behavior in general.

Suggested Citation

  • Tânia Saraiva & Tiago Cruz Gonçalves, 2022. "The Role of Emotions and Knowledge on Preference for Uncertainty: Follow Your Heart but Listen to Your Brain!," Risks, MDPI, vol. 11(1), pages 1-15, December.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jrisks:v:11:y:2022:i:1:p:2-:d:1008862
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2227-9091/11/1/2/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2227-9091/11/1/2/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Richard H. Thaler & Amos Tversky & Daniel Kahneman & Alan Schwartz, 1997. "The Effect of Myopia and Loss Aversion on Risk Taking: An Experimental Test," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 112(2), pages 647-661.
    2. Tiago Cruz Gonçalves, 2021. "The Impact of Discretionary Measurement Criteria on Investors’ Judgement and Decisions," Games, MDPI, vol. 13(1), pages 1-14, December.
    3. Paul Slovic & Melissa L. Finucane & Ellen Peters & Donald G. MacGregor, 2004. "Risk as Analysis and Risk as Feelings: Some Thoughts about Affect, Reason, Risk, and Rationality," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 24(2), pages 311-322, April.
    4. Anna Conte & M. Vittoria Levati & Chiara Nardi, 2018. "Risk Preferences and the Role of Emotions," Economica, London School of Economics and Political Science, vol. 85(338), pages 305-328, April.
    5. George Loewenstein, 2000. "Emotions in Economic Theory and Economic Behavior," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 90(2), pages 426-432, May.
    6. Anna Maffioletti & Michele Santoni, 2019. "Emotion and Knowledge in Decision Making under Uncertainty," Games, MDPI, vol. 10(4), pages 1-28, September.
    7. Hall, Crystal C. & Ariss, Lynn & Todorov, Alexander, 2007. "The illusion of knowledge: When more information reduces accuracy and increases confidence," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 103(2), pages 277-290, July.
    8. Loewenstein, George, 1996. "Out of Control: Visceral Influences on Behavior," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 65(3), pages 272-292, March.
    9. John Ifcher & Homa Zarghamee, 2011. "Happiness and Time Preference: The Effect of Positive Affect in a Random-Assignment Experiment," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 101(7), pages 3109-3129, December.
    10. Michael Kilka & Martin Weber, 2001. "What Determines the Shape of the Probability Weighting Function Under Uncertainty?," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 47(12), pages 1712-1726, December.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Shi Yingnan & Xinghao Li, 2017. "The Time Preference of Chinese Tend to be Less Affected by Positive Emotions: As Proved by an Experimental Study," Journal of Economics and Behavioral Studies, AMH International, vol. 9(4), pages 201-216.
    2. Alex Imas & Michael A. Kuhn & Vera Mironova, 2015. "A History of Violence: Field Evidence on Trauma, Discounting and Present Bias," CESifo Working Paper Series 5338, CESifo.
    3. Frank Hubers & Dinand Webbink, 2024. "Altruistic behavior and soccer: the effect of incidental happiness on charitable giving," Scandinavian Journal of Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 126(1), pages 127-154, January.
    4. Zarghamee, Homa S. & Messer, Kent D. & Fooks, Jacob R. & Schulze, William D. & Wu, Shang & Yan, Jubo, 2017. "Nudging charitable giving: Three field experiments," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 66(C), pages 137-149.
    5. Grichnik, Dietmar & Smeja, Alexander & Welpe, Isabell, 2010. "The importance of being emotional: How do emotions affect entrepreneurial opportunity evaluation and exploitation?," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 76(1), pages 15-29, October.
    6. Lina Koppel & David Andersson & India Morrison & Kinga Posadzy & Daniel Västfjäll & Gustav Tinghög, 2017. "The effect of acute pain on risky and intertemporal choice," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 20(4), pages 878-893, December.
    7. Emmanuel PETIT, 2010. "The role of regret in the persistence of anomalies in financial markets (In French)," Cahiers du GREThA (2007-2019) 2010-07, Groupe de Recherche en Economie Théorique et Appliquée (GREThA).
    8. Epper, Thomas & Fehr-Duda, Helga, 2017. "A Tale of Two Tails: On the Coexistence of Overweighting and Underweighting of Rare Extreme Events," Economics Working Paper Series 1705, University of St. Gallen, School of Economics and Political Science.
    9. repec:cup:judgdm:v:17:y:2022:i:5:p:988-1014 is not listed on IDEAS
    10. Kristian Ove R. Myrseth & Gerhard Riener & Conny Wollbrant, 2013. "Tangible temptation in the social dilemma: Cash, cooperation, and self-control," ESMT Research Working Papers ESMT-13-04, ESMT European School of Management and Technology.
    11. Andrew J. Oswald & Eugenio Proto & Daniel Sgroi, 2015. "Happiness and Productivity," Journal of Labor Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 33(4), pages 789-822.
    12. Ivan Barreda-Tarrazona & Ainhoa Jaramillo-Gutierrez & Daniel Navarro-Martinez & Gerardo Sabater-Grande, 2014. "The role of forgone opportunities in decision making under risk," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 49(2), pages 167-188, October.
    13. Pierluigi Conzo, 2018. "Natural Disasters and Social Preferences: The Effect of Tsunami-Memories on Cheating in Sri Lanka," Journal of Development Studies, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 54(10), pages 1912-1931, October.
    14. Martin G. Kocher & Peter Martinsson & Kristian Ove R. Myrseth & Conny E. Wollbrant, 2017. "Strong, bold, and kind: self-control and cooperation in social dilemmas," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 20(1), pages 44-69, March.
    15. Marysia Ogrodnik, 2015. "An Economic Model of the Stages of Addictive Consumption," Post-Print halshs-01224553, HAL.
    16. Ute Rink & Theresa Rollwage, 2022. "Household disability and time preferences: Evidence from incentivized experiments in Vietnam," TVSEP Working Papers wp-027, Leibniz Universitaet Hannover, Institute for Environmental Economics and World Trade, Project TVSEP.
    17. Anna Maffioletti & Michele Santoni, 2019. "Emotion and Knowledge in Decision Making under Uncertainty," Games, MDPI, vol. 10(4), pages 1-28, September.
    18. Sumit S. Deole & Yue Huang, 2024. "Suffering and prejudice: do negative emotions predict immigration concerns?," Journal of Population Economics, Springer;European Society for Population Economics, vol. 37(2), pages 1-39, June.
    19. Martinsson, Peter & Myrseth, Kristian Ove R. & Wollbrant, Conny, 2010. "Reconciling Pro-Social vs. Selfish Behavior - Evidence for the Role of Self-Control," Working Papers in Economics 445, University of Gothenburg, Department of Economics.
    20. repec:jdm:journl:v:17:y:2022:i:5:p:988-1014 is not listed on IDEAS
    21. Delis, Manthos D. & Mylonidis, Nikolaos, 2015. "Trust, happiness, and households’ financial decisions," Journal of Financial Stability, Elsevier, vol. 20(C), pages 82-92.
    22. Reuben, Ernesto & van Winden, Frans, 2008. "Social ties and coordination on negative reciprocity: The role of affect," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 92(1-2), pages 34-53, February.

    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:gam:jrisks:v:11:y:2022:i:1:p:2-:d:1008862. 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: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    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.