IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/kap/theord/v92y2022i3d10.1007_s11238-022-09871-2.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

A gene–brain–behavior basis for familiarity bias in source preference

Author

Listed:
  • Robin Chark

    (University of Macau)

  • Songfa Zhong

    (National University of Singapore)

  • Shui Ying Tsang

    (Hai Kang Life Corporation Ltd., Hong Kong Science Park)

  • Chiea Chuen Khor

    (Genome Institute of Singapore)

  • Richard P. Ebstein

    (Southwestern University of Finance and Economics)

  • Hong Xue

    (Hong Kong University of Science and Technology)

  • Soo Hong Chew

    (National University of Singapore
    Southwestern University of Finance and Economics)

Abstract

Source preference in which equally distributed risks may be valued differently has been receiving increasing attention. Using subjects recruited in Berkeley, Fox and Tversky (1995) demonstrate a familiarity bias in source preference—betting on a less than even-chance event based on San Francisco temperature is valued more than betting on a better than even-chance event based on Istanbul temperature. Neophobia is associated with the amygdala which is GABA-rich and is known to be modulated by benzodiazepines as anxiolytic agents that enhance the activity of the GABAA receptor in processing anxiety and fear. This leads to our hypothesis that familiarity bias in decision making may be explained by polymorphic variations in this receptor mediated by anxiety regulation in the amygdala. In two companion studies involving Beijing-based subjects, we examine 10 single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) of GABRB2 (coding for GABAA receptor, beta 2 subunit) and find 7 SNPs each showing negative association between familiarity bias—preference for betting on parity of Beijing temperature over Tokyo temperature—and having at least one minor allele (less than 50% prevalence). In an imaging genetics study of a subsample of subjects based on the SNP with the most balanced allelic distribution, we find that subjects’ familiarity bias in terms of risk aversion towards bets on the parity of the temperature of 20 Chinese cities is negatively associated with their post-scanning familiarity ratings of the cities only for those with no minor allele in this SNP. Moreover, familiarity bias is positively associated with activation in the right amygdala along with the brain’s attention networks. Overall, our findings help discriminate between ambiguity aversion and familiarity bias in source preference and supports our gene–brain–behavior hypothesis of GABAergic modulation of amygdala activation in response to familiarity towards the source of uncertainty.

Suggested Citation

  • Robin Chark & Songfa Zhong & Shui Ying Tsang & Chiea Chuen Khor & Richard P. Ebstein & Hong Xue & Soo Hong Chew, 2022. "A gene–brain–behavior basis for familiarity bias in source preference," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 92(3), pages 531-567, April.
  • Handle: RePEc:kap:theord:v:92:y:2022:i:3:d:10.1007_s11238-022-09871-2
    DOI: 10.1007/s11238-022-09871-2
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s11238-022-09871-2
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s11238-022-09871-2?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. Mohammed Abdellaoui & Aurelien Baillon & Laetitia Placido & Peter P. Wakker, 2011. "The Rich Domain of Uncertainty: Source Functions and Their Experimental Implementation," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 101(2), pages 695-723, April.
    2. Tversky, Amos & Kahneman, Daniel, 1992. "Advances in Prospect Theory: Cumulative Representation of Uncertainty," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 5(4), pages 297-323, October.
    3. Chew, Soo Hong & Sagi, Jacob S., 2008. "Small worlds: Modeling attitudes toward sources of uncertainty," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 139(1), pages 1-24, March.
    4. Soo Hong Chew & King King Li & Robin Chark & Songfa Zhong, 2008. "Source preference and ambiguity aversion: models and evidence from behavioral and neuroimaging experiments," Advances in Health Economics and Health Services Research, in: Neuroeconomics, pages 179-201, Emerald Group Publishing Limited.
    5. A. V. Muthukrishnan & Luc Wathieu & Alison Jing Xu, 2009. "Ambiguity Aversion and the Preference for Established Brands," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 55(12), pages 1933-1941, December.
    6. Maurice Obstfeld & Kenneth Rogoff, 2001. "The Six Major Puzzles in International Macroeconomics: Is There a Common Cause?," NBER Chapters, in: NBER Macroeconomics Annual 2000, Volume 15, pages 339-412, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    7. Bechara, Antoine & Damasio, Antonio R., 2005. "The somatic marker hypothesis: A neural theory of economic decision," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 52(2), pages 336-372, August.
    8. French, Kenneth R & Poterba, James M, 1991. "Investor Diversification and International Equity Markets," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 81(2), pages 222-226, May.
    9. Craig R. Fox & Amos Tversky, 1995. "Ambiguity Aversion and Comparative Ignorance," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 110(3), pages 585-603.
    10. van der Loos, Matthijs J. H. M. & Benjamin, Daniel J. & Cesarini, David & Dawes, Christopher T. & Koellinger, Philipp D. & Magnusson, Patrik K. E. & Chabris, Christopher F. & Conley, Dalton & Laibson,, 2012. "The Genetic Architecture of Economic and Political Preferences," Scholarly Articles 10121961, Harvard University Department of Economics.
    11. Huberman, Gur, 2001. "Familiarity Breeds Investment," The Review of Financial Studies, Society for Financial Studies, vol. 14(3), pages 659-680.
    12. Aysu Okbay & Jonathan P. Beauchamp & Mark Alan Fontana & James J. Lee & Tune H. Pers & Cornelius A. Rietveld & Patrick Turley & Guo-Bo Chen & Valur Emilsson & S. Fleur W. Meddens & Sven Oskarsson & Jo, 2016. "Genome-wide association study identifies 74 loci associated with educational attainment," Nature, Nature, vol. 533(7604), pages 539-542, May.
    13. Camerer, Colin & Dreber, Anna & Forsell, Eskil & Ho, Teck-Hua & Huber, Jurgen & Johannesson, Magnus & Kirchler, Michael & Almenberg, Johan & Altmejd, Adam & Chan, Taizan & Heikensten, Emma & Holzmeist, 2016. "Evaluating replicability of laboratory experiments in Economics," MPRA Paper 75461, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    14. Campbell, Margaret C & Keller, Kevin Lane, 2003. "Brand Familiarity and Advertising Repetition Effects," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 30(2), pages 292-304, September.
    15. Henrik Cronqvist & Florian Münkel & Stephan Siegel, 2014. "Genetics, Homeownership, and Home Location Choice," The Journal of Real Estate Finance and Economics, Springer, vol. 48(1), pages 79-111, January.
    16. Chabris, C. F. & Lee, J. J. & Cesarini, D. & Benjamin, D. J. & Laibson, David I., 2015. "The Fourth Law of Behavior Genetics," Scholarly Articles 30780203, Harvard University Department of Economics.
    17. Soo Chew & Richard Ebstein & Songfa Zhong, 2012. "Ambiguity aversion and familiarity bias: Evidence from behavioral and gene association studies," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 44(1), pages 1-18, February.
    18. Katarina Gospic & Erik Mohlin & Peter Fransson & Predrag Petrovic & Magnus Johannesson & Martin Ingvar, 2011. "Limbic Justice—Amygdala Involvement in Immediate Rejection in the Ultimatum Game," PLOS Biology, Public Library of Science, vol. 9(5), pages 1-8, May.
    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. Veronica Cappelli & Simone Cerreia-Vioglio & Fabio Maccheroni & Massimo Marinacci & Stefania Minardi, 2021. "Sources of Uncertainty and Subjective Prices," Journal of the European Economic Association, European Economic Association, vol. 19(2), pages 872-912.
    2. Dennis Dlugosch & Kristian Horn & Mei Wang, 2014. "Behavioral determinants of home bias - theory and experiment," Working Papers 2014-11, Faculty of Economics and Statistics, Universität Innsbruck.
    3. Ali al-Nowaihi & Sanjit Dhami & Mengxing Wei, 2018. "Quantum Decision Theory and the Ellsberg Paradox," CESifo Working Paper Series 7158, CESifo.
    4. Milos Borozan & Loreta Cannito & Barbara Luppi, 2022. "A tale of two ambiguities: A conceptual overview of findings from economics and psychology," Journal of Behavioral Economics for Policy, Society for the Advancement of Behavioral Economics (SABE), vol. 6(S1), pages 11-21, July.
    5. Ali al-Nowaihi & Sanjit Dhami, 2016. "The Ellsberg paradox: A challenge to quantum decision theory?," Discussion Papers in Economics 16/08, Division of Economics, School of Business, University of Leicester.
    6. Soo Chew & Richard Ebstein & Songfa Zhong, 2012. "Ambiguity aversion and familiarity bias: Evidence from behavioral and gene association studies," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 44(1), pages 1-18, February.
    7. Cédric Gutierrez & Emmanuel Kemel, 2021. "Measuring natural source dependence," Working Papers hal-03330409, HAL.
    8. Ning Du & David V. Budescu, 2005. "The Effects of Imprecise Probabilities and Outcomes in Evaluating Investment Options," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 51(12), pages 1791-1803, December.
    9. Frick, Mira & Iijima, Ryota & Le Yaouanq, Yves, 2019. "Boolean Representations of Preferences under Ambiguity," Rationality and Competition Discussion Paper Series 173, CRC TRR 190 Rationality and Competition.
    10. Zhihua Li & Julia Müller & Peter P. Wakker & Tong V. Wang, 2018. "The Rich Domain of Ambiguity Explored," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 64(7), pages 3227-3240, July.
    11. Masaki Aoyagi & Takehito Masuda & Naoko Nishimura, 2021. "Strategic Uncertainty and Probabilistic Sophistication," ISER Discussion Paper 1117, Institute of Social and Economic Research, The University of Osaka.
    12. Li, Jiangyan & Fairley, Kim & Fenneman, Achiel, 2024. "Does it matter how we produce ambiguity in experiments?," MPRA Paper 122336, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    13. Ilke Aydogan & Loïc Berger & Valentina Bosetti & Ning Liu, 2023. "Three Layers of Uncertainty," Journal of the European Economic Association, European Economic Association, vol. 21(5), pages 2209-2236.
    14. Maren Baars & Michael Goedde‐Menke, 2022. "Ignorance illusion in decisions under risk: The impact of perceived expertise on probability weighting," Journal of Risk & Insurance, The American Risk and Insurance Association, vol. 89(1), pages 35-62, March.
    15. Li, Chen & Turmunkh, Uyanga & Wakker, Peter P., 2020. "Social and strategic ambiguity versus betrayal aversion," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 123(C), pages 272-287.
    16. Li, Zheng & Hensher, David A. & Zeng, Jingjing, 2022. "Travel choice behaviour under uncertainty in real-market settings: A source-dependent utility approach," Transportation Research Part E: Logistics and Transportation Review, Elsevier, vol. 168(C).
    17. Han Bleichrodt & Simon Grant & Jingni Yang, 2023. "Testing Hurwicz Expected Utility," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 91(4), pages 1393-1416, July.
    18. Cédric Gutierrez & Emmanuel Kemel, 2024. "Measuring natural source dependence," Post-Print hal-04866878, HAL.
    19. Aurélien Baillon & Han Bleichrodt & Chen Li & Peter P. Wakker, 2025. "Source Theory : A Tractable and Positive Ambiguity Theory," Post-Print hal-04964898, HAL.
    20. Andreas Oehler & Julian Schneider, 2022. "Gambling with lottery stocks?," Journal of Asset Management, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 23(6), pages 477-503, October.

    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:92:y:2022:i:3:d:10.1007_s11238-022-09871-2. 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.