IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/wly/japmet/v41y2026i1p127-133.html

Narrow Framing in Risk Aversion Experiments: Further Evidence From a Wide Replication

Author

Listed:
  • Ariel Gu
  • Matthew J. Walker
  • Hong Il Yoo

Abstract

When evaluating risky options in experimental settings, do individuals integrate background finances with experimental earnings? An existing study, which combines experimental data on lottery choices and administrative data on personal wealth in Denmark, shows that individuals evaluate experimental payoffs in isolation. We replicate this finding using data from three experiments and survey‐based measures of background finances for a representative Dutch sample. We show that the finding based on personal wealth extends to household wealth, personal income, and household income. The finding is also robust to different elicitation instruments, incentive structures, stake sizes, and interpersonal behavioral heterogeneity.

Suggested Citation

  • Ariel Gu & Matthew J. Walker & Hong Il Yoo, 2026. "Narrow Framing in Risk Aversion Experiments: Further Evidence From a Wide Replication," Journal of Applied Econometrics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 41(1), pages 127-133, January.
    • Handle: RePEc:wly:japmet:v:41:y:2026:i:1:p:127-133
    DOI: 10.1002/jae.70010
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1002/jae.70010
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1002/jae.70010?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
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Matthew Rabin, 2000. "Risk Aversion and Expected-Utility Theory: A Calibration Theorem," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 68(5), pages 1281-1292, September.
    2. Viscusi, W Kip & Evans, William N, 1990. "Utility Functions That Depend on Health Status: Estimates and Economic Implications," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 80(3), pages 353-374, June.
    3. Tomomi Tanaka & Colin F. Camerer & Quang Nguyen, 2010. "Risk and Time Preferences: Linking Experimental and Household Survey Data from Vietnam," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 100(1), pages 557-571, March.
    4. Cicchetti, Charles J & Dubin, Jeffrey A, 1994. "A Microeconometric Analysis of Risk Aversion and the Decision to Self-Insure," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 102(1), pages 169-186, February.
    5. Gary Charness & Thomas Garcia & Theo Offerman & Marie Claire Villeval, 2020. "Do measures of risk attitude in the laboratory predict behavior under risk in and outside of the laboratory?," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 60(2), pages 99-123, April.
    6. Quang Nguyen & Colin Camerer & Tomomi Tanaka, 2010. "Risk and Time Preferences Linking Experimental and Household Data from Vietnam," Post-Print halshs-00547090, HAL.
    7. Drerup, Tilman & Enke, Benjamin & von Gaudecker, Hans-Martin, 2017. "The precision of subjective data and the explanatory power of economic models," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 200(2), pages 378-389.
    8. Shelby Gerking & Wiktor Adamowicz & Mark Dickie & Marcella Veronesi, 2017. "Baseline risk and marginal willingness to pay for health risk reduction," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 55(2), pages 177-202, December.
    9. Steffen Andersen & James C. Cox & Glenn W. Harrison & Morten I. Lau & E. Elisabet Rutström & Vjollca Sadiraj, 2018. "Asset Integration and Attitudes toward Risk: Theory and Evidence," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 100(5), pages 816-830, December.
    10. Milton Friedman & L. J. Savage, 1952. "The Expected-Utility Hypothesis and the Measurability of Utility," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 60(6), pages 463-463.
    11. Markowitz, Harry M, 1991. "Foundations of Portfolio Theory," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 46(2), pages 469-477, June.
    12. Alma Cohen & Liran Einav, 2007. "Estimating Risk Preferences from Deductible Choice," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 97(3), pages 745-788, June.
    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. Daniel Paravisini & Veronica Rappoport & Enrichetta Ravina, 2017. "Risk Aversion and Wealth: Evidence from Person-to-Person Lending Portfolios," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 63(2), pages 279-297, February.
    2. James Alm & Antoine Malézieux, 2021. "40 years of tax evasion games: a meta-analysis," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 24(3), pages 699-750, September.
    3. Gary Charness & Thomas Garcia & Theo Offerman & Marie Claire Villeval, 2020. "Do measures of risk attitude in the laboratory predict behavior under risk in and outside of the laboratory?," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 60(2), pages 99-123, April.
    4. Levon Barseghyan & Francesca Molinari & Ted O'Donoghue & Joshua C. Teitelbaum, 2013. "The Nature of Risk Preferences: Evidence from Insurance Choices," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 103(6), pages 2499-2529, October.
    5. Glenn W. Harrison, 2024. "Risk preferences and risk perceptions in insurance experiments: some methodological challenges," The Geneva Risk and Insurance Review, Palgrave Macmillan;International Association for the Study of Insurance Economics (The Geneva Association), vol. 49(1), pages 127-161, March.
    6. Johannes G. Jaspersen & Marc A. Ragin & Justin R. Sydnor, 2022. "Predicting insurance demand from risk attitudes," Journal of Risk & Insurance, The American Risk and Insurance Association, vol. 89(1), pages 63-96, March.
    7. Li, Cong & Chen, Danlei & Wu, Jingxian & Liu, Qiqi, 2025. "Effectiveness of direct and indirect time preference elicitation methods across domains in predicting health behaviors: Evidence from Rural China," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 119(C).
    8. Keil, Alwin & Nielsen, Thea, 2012. "Accounting for farmers’ risk preferences in investigating land allocation decisions in marginal environments: a test of various elicitation measures in an application from Vietnam," 2012 Conference, August 18-24, 2012, Foz do Iguacu, Brazil 126054, International Association of Agricultural Economists.
    9. Carvalho, Leandro S. & Prina, Silvia & Sydnor, Justin, 2016. "The effect of saving on risk attitudes and intertemporal choices," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 120(C), pages 41-52.
    10. Jetter, Michael & Magnusson, Leandro M. & Roth, Sebastian, 2020. "Becoming sensitive: Males’ risk and time preferences after the 2008 financial crisis," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 128(C).
    11. J. François Outreville, 2015. "The Relationship Between Relative Risk Aversion And The Level Of Education: A Survey And Implications For The Demand For Life Insurance," Journal of Economic Surveys, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 29(1), pages 97-111, February.
    12. Mariam Raheem & Ain ul Momina, 2021. "Do Underlying Risk Preferences explain Individuals’ Cognitive Ability? Evidence from a Sample of Pakistani Students," Lahore Journal of Economics, Department of Economics, The Lahore School of Economics, vol. 26(1), pages 85-122, Jan-June.
    13. Kanchan Joshi & Thiagu Ranganathan & Ram Ranjan, 2021. "Exploring Higher Order Risk Preferences of Farmers in a Water-Scarce Region: Evidence from a Field Experiment in West Bengal, India," Journal of Quantitative Economics, Springer;The Indian Econometric Society (TIES), vol. 19(2), pages 317-344, June.
    14. Ryan O. Murphy & Robert H. W. ten Brincke, 2018. "Hierarchical Maximum Likelihood Parameter Estimation for Cumulative Prospect Theory: Improving the Reliability of Individual Risk Parameter Estimates," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 64(1), pages 308-328, January.
    15. Schneider, Sebastian O. & Sutter, Matthias, 2020. "Higher Order Risk Preferences: Experimental Measures, Determinants and Related Field Behavior," VfS Annual Conference 2020 (Virtual Conference): Gender Economics 224643, Verein für Socialpolitik / German Economic Association.
    16. Li Donni, P., 2010. "Risk Preference Heterogeneity And Multiple Demand For Insurance," Health, Econometrics and Data Group (HEDG) Working Papers 10/17, HEDG, c/o Department of Economics, University of York.
    17. Kpegli, Yao Thibaut & Corgnet, Brice & Zylbersztejn, Adam, 2023. "All at once! A comprehensive and tractable semi-parametric method to elicit prospect theory components," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 104(C).
    18. Aurélien Baillon & Han Bleichrodt & Aysil Emirmahmutoglu & Johannes Jaspersen & Richard Peter, 2022. "When Risk Perception Gets in the Way: Probability Weighting and Underprevention," Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 70(3), pages 1371-1392, May.
    19. Wencong Lu & Abdul Latif & Raza Ullah, 2017. "Simultaneous adoption of contract farming and off-farm diversification for managing agricultural risks: the case of flue-cured Virginia tobacco in Pakistan," Natural Hazards: Journal of the International Society for the Prevention and Mitigation of Natural Hazards, Springer;International Society for the Prevention and Mitigation of Natural Hazards, vol. 86(3), pages 1347-1361, April.
    20. Holzmeister, Felix & Stefan, Matthias, 2019. "The Risk Elicitation Puzzle Revisited: Across-Methods (In)consistency?," OSF Preprints pj9u2, Center for Open Science.

    More about this item

    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:wly:japmet:v:41:y:2026:i:1:p:127-133. 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: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.interscience.wiley.com/jpages/0883-7252/ .

    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.