IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/fip/fedlwp/2006-014.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Why people choose negative expected return assets - an empirical examination of a utility theoretic explanation

Author

Listed:
  • Nalinaksha Bhattacharyya
  • Thomas A. Garrett

Abstract

Using a theoretical extension of the Friedman and Savage (1948) utility function developed in Bhattacharyya (2003), we predict that for financial assets with negative expected returns, expected return will be a declining and convex function of skewness. Using a sample of U.S. state lottery games, we find that our theoretical conclusions are supported by the data. Our results have external validity as they also hold for an alternative and more aggregated sample of lottery game data.

Suggested Citation

  • Nalinaksha Bhattacharyya & Thomas A. Garrett, 2006. "Why people choose negative expected return assets - an empirical examination of a utility theoretic explanation," Working Papers 2006-014, Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis.
    • Handle: RePEc:fip:fedlwp:2006-014
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://research.stlouisfed.org/wp/2006/2006-014.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Russell Sobel & S. Travis Raines, 2003. "An examination of the empirical derivatives of the favourite-longshot bias in racetrack betting," Applied Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 35(4), pages 371-385.
    2. Roger Hartley & Lisa Farrell, 2002. "Can Expected Utility Theory Explain Gambling?," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 92(3), pages 613-624, June.
    3. Kearney, Melissa Schettini, 2005. "State lotteries and consumer behavior," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 89(11-12), pages 2269-2299, December.
    4. Daniel Kahneman & Amos Tversky, 2013. "Prospect Theory: An Analysis of Decision Under Risk," World Scientific Book Chapters, in: Leonard C MacLean & William T Ziemba (ed.), HANDBOOK OF THE FUNDAMENTALS OF FINANCIAL DECISION MAKING Part I, chapter 6, pages 99-127, World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd..
    5. McEnally, Richard W, 1974. "A Note on the Return Behavior of High Risk Common Stocks," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 29(1), pages 199-202, March.
    6. Clotfelter, Charles T & Cook, Philip J, 1991. "Lotteries in the Real World," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 4(3), pages 227-232, July.
    7. Kraus, Alan & Litzenberger, Robert H, 1976. "Skewness Preference and the Valuation of Risk Assets," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 31(4), pages 1085-1100, September.
    8. W. David Walls & Kelly Busche, 2003. "Broken odds and the favourite-longshot bias in parimutuel betting: a direct test," Applied Economics Letters, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 10(5), pages 311-314, April.
    9. Donkers, Bas & Melenberg, Bertrand & Van Soest, Arthur, 2001. "Estimating Risk Attitudes Using Lotteries: A Large Sample Approach," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 22(2), pages 165-195, March.
    10. Kurt Brannas & Niklas Nordman, 2003. "Conditional skewness modelling for stock returns," Applied Economics Letters, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 10(11), pages 725-728.
    11. Mette Wik & Tewodros Aragie Kebede & Olvar Bergland & Stein Holden, 2004. "On the measurement of risk aversion from experimental data," Applied Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 36(21), pages 2443-2451.
    12. Les Coleman, 2004. "New light on the longshot bias," Applied Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 36(4), pages 315-326.
    13. Garrett, Thomas A. & Sobel, Russell S., 1999. "Gamblers favor skewness, not risk: Further evidence from United States' lottery games," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 63(1), pages 85-90, April.
    14. Ali, Mukhtar M, 1977. "Probability and Utility Estimates for Racetrack Bettors," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 85(4), pages 803-815, August.
    15. Bailey, Martin J & Olson, Mancur & Wonnacott, Paul, 1980. "The Marginal Utility of Income Does not Increase: Borrowing, Lending, and Friedman-Savage Gambles," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 70(3), pages 372-379, June.
    16. Joseph Golec & Maurry Tamarkin, 1998. "Bettors Love Skewness, Not Risk, at the Horse Track," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 106(1), pages 205-225, February.
    17. Milton Friedman & L. J. Savage, 1948. "The Utility Analysis of Choices Involving Risk," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 56(4), pages 279-279.
    18. Quiggin, John, 1991. "On the Optimal Design of Lotteries," Economica, London School of Economics and Political Science, vol. 58(229), pages 1-16, February.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

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


    Cited by:

    1. Eraker, Bjørn & Ready, Mark, 2015. "Do investors overpay for stocks with lottery-like payoffs? An examination of the returns of OTC stocks," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 115(3), pages 486-504.
    2. Narayan, Paresh Kumar & Ahmed, Huson Ali, 2014. "Importance of skewness in decision making: Evidence from the Indian stock exchange," Global Finance Journal, Elsevier, vol. 25(3), pages 260-269.
    3. Christian Gollier, 2020. "Aversion to risk of regret and preference for positively skewed risks," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 70(4), pages 913-941, November.
    4. Griffith, Andrew P. & Lewis, Karen E. & Boyer, Christopher N., 2015. "Timing the Purchase of Livestock Risk Protection Insurance for Feeder Cattle," 2015 Annual Meeting, January 31-February 3, 2015, Atlanta, Georgia 196869, Southern Agricultural Economics Association.
    5. Eichner, Thomas & Wagener, Andreas, 2011. "Increases in skewness and three-moment preferences," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 61(2), pages 109-113, March.
    6. Daniel Ladley & Guanqing Liu & James Rockey, 2016. "Margin Trading: Hedonic Returns and Real Losses," Discussion Papers in Economics 16/06, Division of Economics, School of Business, University of Leicester.
    7. Del Viva, Luca & Kasanen, Eero & Saunders, Anthony & Trigeorgis, Lenos, 2021. "US government TARP bailout and bank lottery behavior," Journal of Corporate Finance, Elsevier, vol. 66(C).
    8. Ladley, Daniel & Liu, Guanqing & Rockey, James, 2020. "Losing money on the margin," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 172(C), pages 107-136.
    9. Gollier, Christian, 2016. "Explaining rank-dependent utility with regret and rejoicing," IDEI Working Papers 863, Institut d'Économie Industrielle (IDEI), Toulouse.

    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. Philip Grossman & Catherine Eckel, 2015. "Loving the long shot: Risk taking with skewed lotteries," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 51(3), pages 195-217, December.
    2. Martin Kukuk & Stefan Winter, 2008. "An Alternative Explanation of the Favorite-Longshot Bias," Journal of Gambling Business and Economics, University of Buckingham Press, vol. 2(2), pages 79-96, September.
    3. Stefan Winter & Martin Kukuk, 2008. "Do horses like vodka and sponging? - On market manipulation and the favourite-longshot bias," Applied Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 40(1), pages 75-87.
    4. Kearney, Melissa Schettini, 2005. "State lotteries and consumer behavior," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 89(11-12), pages 2269-2299, December.
    5. Humphreys, Brad & Perez, Levi, 2011. "Lottery Participants and Revenues: An International Survey of Economic Research on Lotteries," Working Papers 2011-17, University of Alberta, Department of Economics.
    6. Brennan C. Platt & Joseph Price & Henry Tappen, 2013. "The Role of Risk Preferences in Pay-to-Bid Auctions," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 59(9), pages 2117-2134, September.
    7. Martijn J. Burger & Martijn Hendriks & Emma Pleeging & Jan C. Ours, 2020. "The joy of lottery play: evidence from a field experiment," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 23(4), pages 1235-1256, December.
    8. Lionel Page & Robert T. Clemen, 2013. "Do Prediction Markets Produce Well‐Calibrated Probability Forecasts?-super-," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 123(568), pages 491-513, May.
    9. Philip W. S. Newall & Dominic Cortis, 2021. "Are Sports Bettors Biased toward Longshots, Favorites, or Both? A Literature Review," Risks, MDPI, vol. 9(1), pages 1-9, January.
    10. Mark Schneider & Robert Day, 2018. "Target-Adjusted Utility Functions and Expected-Utility Paradoxes," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 64(1), pages 271-287, January.
    11. Gabrielyan, Gnel & Just, David R., 2017. "Economic Factors Affecting Lottery Sales: An Examination of Maine State Lottery Sales," 2017 Annual Meeting, July 30-August 1, Chicago, Illinois 258419, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    12. Garrett, Thomas A. & Sobel, Russell S., 1999. "Gamblers favor skewness, not risk: Further evidence from United States' lottery games," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 63(1), pages 85-90, April.
    13. Kent Grote & Victor Matheson, 2011. "The Economics of Lotteries: An Annotated Bibliography," Working Papers 1110, College of the Holy Cross, Department of Economics.
    14. Jullien, Bruno & Salanié, Bernard, 2005. "Empirical Evidence on the Preferences of Racetrack Bettors," IDEI Working Papers 178, Institut d'Économie Industrielle (IDEI), Toulouse.
    15. Egon Franck & Erwin Verbeek & Stephan Nüesch, 2011. "Sentimental Preferences and the Organizational Regime of Betting Markets," Southern Economic Journal, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 78(2), pages 502-518, October.
    16. Maschke Mario & Schmidt Ulrich, 2011. "Das Wettmonopol in Deutschland: Status quo und Reformansätze," Zeitschrift für Wirtschaftspolitik, De Gruyter, vol. 60(1), pages 110-124, April.
    17. Erik Snowberg & Justin Wolfers, 2010. "Explaining the Favorite-Long Shot Bias: Is it Risk-Love or Misperceptions?," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 118(4), pages 723-746, August.
    18. M. Cain & D. Peel & D. Law, 2002. "Skewness as an explanation of gambling by locally risk averse agents," Applied Economics Letters, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 9(15), pages 1025-1028.
    19. Marshall Gramm & C. Nicholas McKinney & Douglas H. Owens & Matt E. Ryan, 2007. "What Do Bettors Want? Determinants of Pari‐Mutuel Betting Preference," American Journal of Economics and Sociology, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 66(3), pages 465-491, July.
    20. Martin Chegere & Paolo Falco & Marco Nieddiu & Lorenzo Pandolfi & Mattea Stein, 2022. "It’s a Sure Win! Experimental evidence on overconfidence in betting behavior," CSEF Working Papers 655, Centre for Studies in Economics and Finance (CSEF), University of Naples, Italy.

    More about this item

    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:fip:fedlwp:2006-014. 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: Anna Oates (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/frbslus.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.