Do monetary incentives and chained questions affect the validity of risk estimates elicited via the Exchangeability Method? An experimental investigation
Using a laboratory experiment, we investigate the validity of stated risks elicited via the Exchangeability Method (EM) using an evaluation method based on de Finetti’s notion of coherence, under which probability estimates are valid if and only if they obey all axioms of probability theory. The validity of risk estimates elicited through the EM has been theoretically questioned because the chained structure of the game is thought to potentially undermine the incentive compatibility of the elicitation mechanism even when real monetary incentives are provided. We investigate this by designing and implementing four experimental treatments. Respondents are divided in two initial treatment groups: in the first, they are provided with real monetary incentives, and in the second, subjects are not. Each group is further sub-divided in two treatment groups, in the first, the chained structure of the experimental design made quite clear to the subjects, while, in the second, the chained structure is hidden by resorting the elicitation questions. The superiority of real monetary incentives is not evident when people are presented with chained experimental design.
|Date of creation:||Jun 2012|
|Contact details of provider:|| Web page: http://www.iaae-agecon.org/|
More information through EDIRC
Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:
- Steffen Andersen & John Fountain & Glenn Harrison & E. Rutström, 2014.
"Estimating subjective probabilities,"
Journal of Risk and Uncertainty,
Springer, vol. 48(3), pages 207-229, June.
- Andersen, Steffen & Fountain, John & Harrison, Glenn W. & Rutström, Elisabet E., 2009. "Estimating Subjective Probabilities," Working Papers 05-2009, Copenhagen Business School, Department of Economics.
- Steffen Andersen & John Fountain & Glenn W. Harrison & E. Elisabet RutstrÃ¶m, 2010. "Estimating Subjective Probabilities," Experimental Economics Center Working Paper Series 2010-08, Experimental Economics Center, Andrew Young School of Policy Studies, Georgia State University.
- Glenn W. Harrison & John A. List, 2004. "Field Experiments," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 42(4), pages 1009-1055, December.
- Glenn Harrison & John List, 2004. "Field experiments," Artefactual Field Experiments 00058, The Field Experiments Website.
- John List & David Reiley, 2008. "Field experiments," Artefactual Field Experiments 00091, The Field Experiments Website.
- Machina, Mark J & Schmeidler, David, 1992. "A More Robust Definition of Subjective Probability," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 60(4), pages 745-780, July.
- Theo Offerman & Joep Sonnemans & Gijs Van De Kuilen & Peter P. Wakker, 2009. "A Truth Serum for Non-Bayesians: Correcting Proper Scoring Rules for Risk Attitudes ," Review of Economic Studies, Oxford University Press, vol. 76(4), pages 1461-1489.
- Viscusi, W Kip, 1990. "Do Smokers Underestimate Risks?," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 98(6), pages 1253-1269, December.
- 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.
- Mohammed Abdellaoui & Laetitia Placido & Aurélien Baillon & P.P. Wakker, 2011. "The Rich Domain of Uncertainty: Source Functions and Their Experimental Implementation," Université Paris1 Panthéon-Sorbonne (Post-Print and Working Papers) hal-00609214, HAL.
- W. Douglass Shaw & Paul M. Jakus & Mary Riddel, 2012. "Perceived Arsenic-Related Mortality Risks For Smokers And Non-Smokers," Contemporary Economic Policy, Western Economic Association International, vol. 30(3), pages 417-429, 07.
- Glenn W Harrison & John A List & Charles Towe, 2007. "Naturally Occurring Preferences and Exogenous Laboratory Experiments: A Case Study of Risk Aversion," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 75(2), pages 433-458, 03.
- Glenn Harrison & John List & Charles Towe, 2004. "Naturally occurring preferences and exogenous laboratory experiments: A case study of risk aversion," Framed Field Experiments 00155, The Field Experiments Website.
- Jakus, Paul M. & Shaw, W. Douglass & Nguyen, To N. & Walker, Mark, 2009. "Risk Perceptions of Arsenic in Tap Water and Consumption of Bottled Water," 2009 Annual Meeting, July 26-28, 2009, Milwaukee, Wisconsin 49221, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
- Fiore, Stephen M. & Harrison, Glenn W. & Hughes, Charles E. & Rutstrm, E. Elisabet, 2009. "Virtual experiments and environmental policy," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 57(1), pages 65-86, January.
- Harrison, Glenn W., 1986. "An experimental test for risk aversion," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 21(1), pages 7-11.
- Cerroni, Simone & Shaw, W. Douglass, 2012. "Does climate change information affect stated risks of pine beetle impacts on forests? An application of the exchangeability method," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 22(C), pages 72-84.
- Andersen, Steffen & Fountain, John & Harrison, Glenn W. & Rutström, Elisabet E., 2009. "Estmating Aversion to Uncertainty," Working Papers 07-2009, Copenhagen Business School, Department of Economics. Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)
When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:ags:iaae12:125468. 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: (AgEcon Search)
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.