IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/mjr/journl/v60y2023i1p29-44.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Comparing Elicitation Methods of Risk Preferences in Personal Financial Planning: A Field Experiment among Working Adults in Malaysia

Author

Listed:
  • Kean-Siang Ch'ng

    (School of Social Sciences, Universiti Sains Malaysia)

  • Phaik Nie Chin

    (Graduate School of Business, Universiti Sains Malaysia)

  • Suzanna A. Bono

    (School of Social Sciences, Universiti Sains Malaysia)

Abstract

Risk preference is an important input in designing investment types or port-folios in personal finance. Although there are many reported risk elicitation methods, the risk preference measure obtained from these methods has not been associated with any behavioural or psychological reasons underlying the choices made. This association is important in providing the underlying theoretical understanding of risk preferences and establishing the robustness of a measure. The present paper attempted to test the consistency of risk preferences between two widely used elicitation methods: Grable and Lytton (1999, 2003) risk tolerance score and probability weighting function in prospect theory (Kahneman & Tversky, 1979; Tversky & Kahneman, 1992). The risk score captures the self-reported willingness to engage in risky investment, and the probability weighting function shows overweighting or underweighting of the probability. We conducted a series of field experiments involving working adults of three main ethnic groups in Malaysia. The results showed consistency in risk preferences between the two methods: high willingness to engage in risk was complemented by optimistic probability weighting, and respondents with low willingness to engage in risky investment evaluated high probability more favourably. The study is useful to financial professionals when implementing the questionnaire to measure risk preferences.

Suggested Citation

  • Kean-Siang Ch'ng & Phaik Nie Chin & Suzanna A. Bono, 2023. "Comparing Elicitation Methods of Risk Preferences in Personal Financial Planning: A Field Experiment among Working Adults in Malaysia," Malaysian Journal of Economic Studies, Faculty of Business and Economics, University of Malaya & Malaysian Economic Association, vol. 60(1), pages 29-44, January.
  • Handle: RePEc:mjr:journl:v:60:y:2023:i:1:p:29-44
    DOI: 10.22452/MJES.vol60no1.2
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    To our knowledge, this item is not available for download. To find whether it is available, there are three options:
    1. Check below whether another version of this item is available online.
    2. Check on the provider's web page whether it is in fact available.
    3. Perform a search for a similarly titled item that would be available.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Grable and Lytton risk tolerance score; probability weighting function; risk preferences; prospect theory; financial counselling and planning;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • C93 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Design of Experiments - - - Field Experiments
    • D91 - Microeconomics - - Micro-Based Behavioral Economics - - - Role and Effects of Psychological, Emotional, Social, and Cognitive Factors on Decision Making
    • G41 - Financial Economics - - Behavioral Finance - - - Role and Effects of Psychological, Emotional, Social, and Cognitive Factors on Decision Making in Financial Markets

    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:mjr:journl:v:60:y:2023:i:1:p:29-44. 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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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: Malaysian Economic Association (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/pemmmea.html .

    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.