IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ehl/lserod/125994.html

Stochastic impatience and the separation of time and risk preferences

Author

Listed:
  • Dillenberger, David
  • Gottlieb, Daniel
  • Ortoleva, Pietro

Abstract

We study how the separation of time and risk preferences relates to a property called Stochastic Impatience. We show that, within a broad class of models, Stochastic Impatience holds if and only if risk aversion and the inverse elasticity of intertemporal substitution are sufficiently close. In the models of Epstein and Zin (1989) and Hansen and Sargent (1995), Stochastic Impatience is violated for commonly used parameters. Our result also provides a simple, one-question test for the separation of time and risk preferences.

Suggested Citation

  • Dillenberger, David & Gottlieb, Daniel & Ortoleva, Pietro, 2025. "Stochastic impatience and the separation of time and risk preferences," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 125994, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    • Handle: RePEc:ehl:lserod:125994
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://researchonline.lse.ac.uk/id/eprint/125994/
    File Function: Open access version.
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Gul, Faruk, 1991. "A Theory of Disappointment Aversion," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 59(3), pages 667-686, 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. Luigi Guiso, 2015. "A Test of Narrow Framing and its Origin," Italian Economic Journal: A Continuation of Rivista Italiana degli Economisti and Giornale degli Economisti, Springer;Società Italiana degli Economisti (Italian Economic Association), vol. 1(1), pages 61-100, March.
    2. Botond Kőszegi & Matthew Rabin, 2006. "A Model of Reference-Dependent Preferences," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 121(4), pages 1133-1165.
    3. Epstein, Larry G. & Zin, Stanley E., 2001. "The independence axiom and asset returns," Journal of Empirical Finance, Elsevier, vol. 8(5), pages 537-572, December.
    4. Ronald M. Harstad & Reinhard Selten, 2013. "Bounded-Rationality Models: Tasks to Become Intellectually Competitive," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 51(2), pages 496-511, June.
    5. Karle, Heiko & Schumacher, Heiner & Vølund, Rune, 2023. "Consumer loss aversion and scale-dependent psychological switching costs," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 138(C), pages 214-237.
    6. Simone Cerreia‐Vioglio & David Dillenberger & Pietro Ortoleva, 2015. "Cautious Expected Utility and the Certainty Effect," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 83, pages 693-728, March.
    7. Houba, Harold & Tieman, Alexander F. & Brinksma, Rene, 1998. "The Nash bargaining solution for decision weight utility functions," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 60(1), pages 41-48, July.
    8. Lucy F. Ackert & Bryan K. Church & Richard Deaves, 2002. "Bubbles in experimental asset markets: Irrational exuberance no more," FRB Atlanta Working Paper 2002-24, Federal Reserve Bank of Atlanta.
    9. Markus Dertwinkel-Kalt & Jonas Frey, 2020. "Optimal Stopping in a Dynamic Salience Model," CESifo Working Paper Series 8496, CESifo.
    10. Luo, Yan & Wang, Xiaohuan & Zhang, Chenyang & Huang, Wei, 2021. "Accounting-based downside risk and expected stock returns: Evidence from China," International Review of Financial Analysis, Elsevier, vol. 78(C).
    11. Heeho Kim, 2013. "Uncertainty and risk premium puzzle," Journal of Economics and Finance, Springer;Academy of Economics and Finance, vol. 37(1), pages 62-79, January.
    12. Michaël Lainé, 2014. "Vers une alternative au paradigme de la rationalité ? Victoires et déboires du programme spinoziste en économie," Post-Print hal-01335618, HAL.
    13. Lucy F. Ackert & Narat Charupat & Bryan K. Church & Richard Deaves, 2006. "Margin, Short Selling, and Lotteries in Experimental Asset Markets," Southern Economic Journal, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 73(2), pages 419-436, October.
    14. Enrico G. De Giorgi & Thierry Post, 2011. "Loss Aversion with a State-Dependent Reference Point," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 57(6), pages 1094-1110, June.
    15. Liu, Yunting & Zhu, Yandi, 2025. "Good idiosyncratic volatility, bad idiosyncratic volatility, and the cross-section of stock returns," Journal of Banking & Finance, Elsevier, vol. 170(C).
    16. Gao, Dong Li & Xie, Wei & Ming Lee, Eric Wai, 2022. "Individual-level exit choice behaviour under uncertain risk," Physica A: Statistical Mechanics and its Applications, Elsevier, vol. 604(C).
    17. Rieger, Marc Oliver & Wang, Mei, 2012. "Can ambiguity aversion solve the equity premium puzzle? Survey evidence from international data," Finance Research Letters, Elsevier, vol. 9(2), pages 63-72.
    18. Josie I. Chen & Kenju Kamei, 2018. "Disapproval aversion or inflated inequity acceptance? The impact of expressing emotions in ultimatum bargaining," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 21(4), pages 836-857, December.
    19. Zhichao Zhang & Fan Zhang & Zhuang Zhang, 2013. "Strategic Asset Allocation for China's Foreign Reserves: A Copula Approach," China & World Economy, Institute of World Economics and Politics, Chinese Academy of Social Sciences, vol. 21(6), pages 1-21, November.
    20. Olivier Chanel & Graciela Chichilnisky, 2009. "The influence of fear in decisions: Experimental evidence," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 39(3), pages 271-298, December.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;

    JEL classification:

    • D81 - Microeconomics - - Information, Knowledge, and Uncertainty - - - Criteria for Decision-Making under Risk and Uncertainty
    • D90 - Microeconomics - - Micro-Based Behavioral Economics - - - General
    • G11 - Financial Economics - - General Financial Markets - - - Portfolio Choice; Investment Decisions

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    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:ehl:lserod:125994. 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: LSERO Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/lsepsuk.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.