IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/now/jnlrbe/105.00000046.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Three Risk-elicitation Methods in the Field - Evidence from Rural Senegal

Author

Listed:
  • Charness, Gary
  • Viceisza, Angelino

Abstract

In the past decade, it has become common to use simple laboratory games and decision tasks as a device for measuring risk preferences in the developing world. In this paper, we build on existing taxonomies for risk-elicitation and discuss pros and cons of using such methods in developing-country contexts. We use three distinct riskelicitation mechanisms (the Holt–Laury task, the Gneezy–Potters mechanism, and a non-incentivized willingness-to-risk scale) and subjects from rural Senegal. Our study provides some guidance to researchers wishing to use risk-elicitation mechanisms in the rural developing world.

Suggested Citation

  • Charness, Gary & Viceisza, Angelino, 2016. "Three Risk-elicitation Methods in the Field - Evidence from Rural Senegal," Review of Behavioral Economics, now publishers, vol. 3(2), pages 145-171, July.
  • Handle: RePEc:now:jnlrbe:105.00000046
    DOI: 10.1561/105.00000046
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.1561/105.00000046
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1561/105.00000046?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
    ---><---

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Giuseppe Attanasi & Nikolaos Georgantzís & Valentina Rotondi & Daria Vigani, 2018. "Lottery- and survey-based risk attitudes linked through a multichoice elicitation task," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 84(3), pages 341-372, May.
    2. Holden, Stein T. & Tilahun, Mesfin, 2020. "Endowment Effects and Loss Aversion in the Risky Investment Game," CLTS Working Papers 1/20, Norwegian University of Life Sciences, Centre for Land Tenure Studies.
    3. Golo-Friedrich Bauermeister & Oliver Mußhoff, 2019. "Multiple switching behaviour in different display formats of multiple price lists," Applied Economics Letters, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 26(1), pages 58-63, January.
    4. Brown, Alexander L. & Healy, Paul J., 2018. "Separated decisions," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 101(C), pages 20-34.
    5. Beine, Michel & Charness, Gary & Dupuy, Arnaud & Joxhe, Majlinda, 2020. "Shaking Things Up: On the Stability of Risk and Time Preferences," IZA Discussion Papers 13084, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    6. Gary Charness & Catherine Eckel & Uri Gneezy & Agne Kajackaite, 2018. "Complexity in risk elicitation may affect the conclusions: A demonstration using gender differences," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 56(1), pages 1-17, February.
    7. Lépine, Aurélia & Treibich, Carole, 2020. "Risk aversion and HIV/AIDS: Evidence from Senegalese female sex workers," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 256(C).
    8. Utteeyo Dasgupta & Subha Mani & Smriti Sharma & Saurabh Singhal, 2017. "Cognitive, socioemotional, and behavioural returns to college quality," WIDER Working Paper Series wp-2017-94, World Institute for Development Economic Research (UNU-WIDER).
    9. Chi Wai Yu & Y. Jane Zhang & Sharon Xuejing Zuo, 2021. "Multiple Switching and Data Quality in the Multiple Price List," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 103(1), pages 136-150, March.
    10. Dasgupta, Utteeyo & Mani, Subha & Sharma, Smriti & Singhal, Saurabh, 2020. "Effects of Peers and Rank on Cognition, Preferences, and Personality," GLO Discussion Paper Series 591, Global Labor Organization (GLO).
    11. Mohan, Sarah, 2020. "Risk aversion and certification: Evidence from the Nepali tea fields," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 129(C).
    12. François-Charles Wolff, 2020. "The intergenerational transmission of risk attitudes: Evidence from Burkina Faso," Review of Economics of the Household, Springer, vol. 18(1), pages 181-206, March.
    13. Holden , Stein T. & Tilahun , Mesfin, 2019. "The Devil is in the Details: Risk Preferences, Choice List Design, and Measurement Error," CLTS Working Papers 3/19, Norwegian University of Life Sciences, Centre for Land Tenure Studies, revised 16 Oct 2019.
    14. Meraner, Manuela & Musshoff, Oliver & Finger, Robert, 2018. "Using involvement to reduce inconsistencies in risk preference elicitation," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 73(C), pages 22-33.
    15. He, Pan, 2018. "Can self-assessed risk attitudes predict behavior under risk? Evidence from a field study in China," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 172(C), pages 107-109.
    16. Estepa-Mohedano, Lorenzo & Espinosa, Maria Paz, 2021. "Comparing risk elicitation in lotteries with visual or contextual framing aids," MPRA Paper 108440, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    17. Ihli, Hanna Julia & Gassner, Anja & Musshoff, Oliver, 2018. "Experimental insights on the investment behavior of small-scale coffee farmers in central Uganda under risk and uncertainty," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 75(C), pages 31-44.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Risk-elicitation; Field Experiments; Laboratory experiments in the field; Comprehension; Rural Senegal; Microeconomics of Development; Risk Preferences; Choice under Risk/Uncertainty;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • B49 - Schools of Economic Thought and Methodology - - Economic Methodology - - - Other
    • C91 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Design of Experiments - - - Laboratory, Individual Behavior
    • C93 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Design of Experiments - - - Field Experiments
    • O13 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Economic Development - - - Agriculture; Natural Resources; Environment; Other Primary Products
    • O20 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Development Planning and Policy - - - General

    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:now:jnlrbe:105.00000046. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: . General contact details of provider: http://www.nowpublishers.com/ .

    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: Alet Heezemans (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.nowpublishers.com/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service hosted by the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis . RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.