IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/kap/theord/v51y2001i2p247-296.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

An Experiment on Rational Insurance Decisions

Author

Listed:
  • Richard Watt
  • Francisco Vázquez
  • Ignacio Moreno

Abstract

We describe the results of an experiment on decision making in an insurance context. The experiment was designed to test for the underlying rationality of insurance consumers, where rationality is understood in usual economic terms. In particular, using expected utility as the preference function, we test for positive marginal utility, risk aversion, and decreasing absolute risk aversion, all of which are normal postulates for any microeconomic decision context under uncertainty or risk. We find that there the discrepancy from rational decision making increases with the sophistication of the rationality criteria, that irrationality concerning fair premium contracts is uncharacteristically high, and that the slope of absolute risk aversion seems to depend on the format of the insurance contract. Copyright Kluwer Academic Publishers 2001

Suggested Citation

  • Richard Watt & Francisco Vázquez & Ignacio Moreno, 2001. "An Experiment on Rational Insurance Decisions," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 51(2), pages 247-296, December.
    • Handle: RePEc:kap:theord:v:51:y:2001:i:2:p:247-296
    DOI: 10.1023/A:1015559127778
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1023/A:1015559127778
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1023/A:1015559127778?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 search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Christian Gollier & Harris Schlesinger, 1996. "Arrow's theorem on the optimality of deductibles: A stochastic dominance approach (*)," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 7(2), pages 359-363.
    2. Sopher & Narramore, 2000. "Stochastic Choice and Consistency in Decision Making Under Risk: An Experimental Study," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 48(4), pages 323-349, June.
    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. Pedro Brandão Graminha & Luís Eduardo Afonso, 2022. "Behavioral Economics and Auto Insurance: The Role of Biases and Heuristics," RAC - Revista de Administração Contemporânea (Journal of Contemporary Administration), ANPAD - Associação Nacional de Pós-Graduação e Pesquisa em Administração, vol. 26(5), pages 200421-2004.
    2. Moreno, Ignacio & Vázquez, Francisco J. & Watt, Richard, 2017. "Rationality and honesty of consumers in insurance decisions," Journal of Economics and Business, Elsevier, vol. 89(C), pages 36-46.
    3. Ranyard, Rob & McHugh, Sandie, 2012. "Defusing the risk of borrowing: The psychology of payment protection insurance decisions," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 33(4), pages 738-748.
    4. Omar Al-Ubaydli & John A. List & Danielle LoRe & Dana Suskind, 2017. "Scaling for Economists: Lessons from the Non-Adherence Problem in the Medical Literature," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 31(4), pages 125-144, Fall.
    5. Johannes G. Jaspersen, 2016. "Hypothetical Surveys And Experimental Studies Of Insurance Demand: A Review," Journal of Risk & Insurance, The American Risk and Insurance Association, vol. 83(1), pages 217-255, January.
    6. Ming Wang & Chuan Liao & Saini Yang & Weiting Zhao & Min Liu & Peijun Shi, 2012. "Are People Willing to Buy Natural Disaster Insurance in China? Risk Awareness, Insurance Acceptance, and Willingness to Pay," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 32(10), pages 1717-1740, October.

    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. Franke, Günter & Herrmann, Markus & Weber, Thomas, 2007. "Information asymmetries and securitization design," CoFE Discussion Papers 07/10, University of Konstanz, Center of Finance and Econometrics (CoFE).
    2. Amarante, Massimiliano & Ghossoub, Mario & Phelps, Edmund, 2015. "Ambiguity on the insurer’s side: The demand for insurance," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 58(C), pages 61-78.
    3. Chateauneuf, Alain & Cohen, Michele & Meilijson, Isaac, 2004. "Four notions of mean-preserving increase in risk, risk attitudes and applications to the rank-dependent expected utility model," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 40(5), pages 547-571, August.
    4. Carole Bernard & Shaolin Ji & Weidong Tian, 2013. "An optimal insurance design problem under Knightian uncertainty," Decisions in Economics and Finance, Springer;Associazione per la Matematica, vol. 36(2), pages 99-124, November.
    5. Moreno, Ignacio & Vázquez, Francisco J. & Watt, Richard, 2017. "Rationality and honesty of consumers in insurance decisions," Journal of Economics and Business, Elsevier, vol. 89(C), pages 36-46.
    6. Franke, Günter, 2004. "Transformation nicht-gehandelter in handelbare Kreditrisiken," CoFE Discussion Papers 04/08, University of Konstanz, Center of Finance and Econometrics (CoFE).
    7. M. Mercè Claramunt & Maite Mármol & Xavier Varea, 2023. "Facing a Risk: To Insure or Not to Insure—An Analysis with the Constant Relative Risk Aversion Utility Function," Mathematics, MDPI, vol. 11(5), pages 1-13, February.
    8. Christopher Gaffney & Adi Ben-Israel, 2016. "A simple insurance model: optimal coverage and deductible," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 237(1), pages 263-279, February.
    9. Simone Cerreia‐Vioglio & David Dillenberger & Pietro Ortoleva, 2015. "Cautious Expected Utility and the Certainty Effect," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 83, pages 693-728, March.
    10. Allen, Roy & Dziewulski, Paweł & Rehbeck, John, 2022. "Making sense of monkey business: Re-examining tests of animal rationality," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 196(C), pages 220-228.
    11. Dillenberger, David & Segal, Uzi, 2017. "Skewed noise," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 169(C), pages 344-364.
    12. Jacques Drèze & Erik Schokkaert, 2013. "Arrow’s theorem of the deductible: Moral hazard and stop-loss in health insurance," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 47(2), pages 147-163, October.
    13. Manel Baucells & Antonio Villasís, 2010. "Stability of risk preferences and the reflection effect of prospect theory," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 68(1), pages 193-211, February.
    14. Malamud, Semyon & Rui, Huaxia & Whinston, Andrew, 2016. "Optimal reinsurance with multiple tranches," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 65(C), pages 71-82.
    15. Xu Zuo Quan & Zhou Xun Yu & Zhuang Sheng Chao, 2015. "Optimal Insurance with Rank-Dependent Utility and Increasing Indemnities," Papers 1509.04839, arXiv.org.
    16. Michael Merz & Mario V. Wüthrich, 2014. "Demand of Insurance under the Cost-of-Capital Premium Calculation Principle," Risks, MDPI, vol. 2(2), pages 1-23, June.
    17. Dana, R. A., 2004. "Market behavior when preferences are generated by second-order stochastic dominance," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 40(6), pages 619-639, September.
    18. Donald Meyer & Jack Meyer, 2010. "Excluded losses and the demand for insurance," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 41(1), pages 1-18, August.
    19. Drèze, Jacques H. & Pestieau, Pierre & Schokkaert, Erik, 2016. "Arrow’s theorem of the deductible and long-term care insurance," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 148(C), pages 103-105.
    20. Mario Ghossoub, 2016. "Optimal Insurance with Heterogeneous Beliefs and Disagreement about Zero-Probability Events," Risks, MDPI, vol. 4(3), pages 1-28, August.

    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:kap:theord:v:51:y:2001:i:2:p:247-296. 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: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.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.