A Test of the Rational Expectations Hypothesis using data from a Natural Experiment
Data on contestants' choices in Italian Game Show Affari Tuoi are analysed in a way that separates the effect of risk attitude (preferences) from that of beliefs concerning the amount of money that will be offered to contestants in future rounds. This separate identification is possible by virtue of the fact that, at a certain stage of the game, beliefs are not relevant, and risk attitude is the sole determinant of choice. The rational expectations hypothesis is tested by comparing the estimated belief function with the "true" offer function which is estimated extraneously using data on offers actually made to contestants. We find a close correspondence, leading us to accept the rational expectations hypothesis. The importance of belief-formation is confirmed by the estimation of a mixture model which establishes that the vast majority of contestants are forward-looking as opposed to myopic.
|Date of creation:||18 Jul 2011|
|Publication status:||Published in Applied Economics, Taylor & Francis (Routledge), 2011, pp.1. <10.1080/00036846.2011.597734>|
|Note:||View the original document on HAL open archive server: https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/hal-00718703|
|Contact details of provider:|| Web page: https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/|
References listed on IDEAS
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.:
- Roger Hartley & Gauthier Lanot & Ian Walker, 2014.
"Who Really Wants To Be A Millionaire? Estimates Of Risk Aversion From Gameshow Data,"
Journal of Applied Econometrics,
John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 29(6), pages 861-879, 09.
- Roger Hartley & Gauthier Lanot & Ian Walker, 2006. "Who really wants to be a millionaire? Estimates of risk aversion from gameshow data," Working Papers 200607, Geary Institute, University College Dublin.
- Hartley, Roger & Lanot, Gauthier & Walker, Ian, 2006. "Who really wants to be a millionaire? Estimates of risk aversion from gameshow data," The Warwick Economics Research Paper Series (TWERPS) 747, University of Warwick, Department of Economics.
- Gauthier Lanot & Roger Hartley & Ian Walker, 2006. "Who Really Wants to be a Millionaire? Estimates of Risk Aversion from Gameshow Data," Keele Economics Research Papers KERP 2006/07, Centre for Economic Research, Keele University.
- Hartley, Roger & Lanot, Gauthier & Walker, Ian, 2005. "Who Really Wants to be a Millionaire : Estimates of Risk Aversion from Game Show Data," The Warwick Economics Research Paper Series (TWERPS) 719, University of Warwick, Department of Economics.
- Loomes, G. & Moffatt, P.G. & Sugden, R., 1998.
"A Microeconometric Test of Alternative Stochastic Theories of Risky Choice,"
University of East Anglia Discussion Papers in Economics
9806, School of Economics, University of East Anglia, Norwich, UK..
- Loomes, Graham & Moffatt, Peter G & Sugden, Robert, 2002. "A Microeconometric Test of Alternative Stochastic Theories of Risky Choice," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 24(2), pages 103-130, March.
- repec:are:cudare:155 is not listed on IDEAS
- Beetsma, Roel M W J & Schotman, Peter C, 2001.
"Measuring Risk Attitudes in a Natural Experiment: Data from the Television Game Show Lingo,"
Royal Economic Society, vol. 111(474), pages 821-848, October.
- Beetsma, Roel & Schotman, Peter C, 1998. "Measuring Risk Attitudes in a Natural Experiment: Data from the Television Game Show LINGO," CEPR Discussion Papers 1893, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
- Beetsma, R.M.W.J. & Schotman, P.C., 1998. "Measuring Risk Attitudes in a Natural Experiment: Data from The Television Game Show LINGO," Papers 98-48, Southern California - School of Business Administration.
- Anna Conte & John D Hey & Peter G Moffatt, 2007.
"Mixture Models of Choice Under Risk,"
07/06, Department of Economics, University of York.
- John D. Bone & John D. Hey & John R. Suckling, 2003. "Do people plan ahead?," Applied Economics Letters, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 10(5), pages 277-280, April.
- Matthew Rabin, 2000.
"Risk Aversion and Expected-Utility Theory: A Calibration Theorem,"
Econometric Society, vol. 68(5), pages 1281-1292, September.
- Rabin, Matthew, 2000. "Risk Aversion and Expected-Utility Theory: A Calibration Theorem," Department of Economics, Working Paper Series qt731230f8, Department of Economics, Institute for Business and Economic Research, UC Berkeley.
- Matthew Rabin, 2001. "Risk Aversion and Expected-Utility Theory: A Calibration Theorem," Method and Hist of Econ Thought 0012001, EconWPA.
- Matthew Rabin., 2000. "Risk Aversion and Expected-Utility Theory: A Calibration Theorem," Economics Working Papers E00-279, University of California at Berkeley.
- Matthew Rabin, 2001. "Risk Aversion and Expected Utility Theory: A Calibration Theorem," Levine's Working Paper Archive 7667, David K. Levine.
- Nicolas de Roos & Yianis Sarafidis, 2010. "Decision making under risk in Deal or No Deal," Journal of Applied Econometrics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 25(6), pages 987-1027.
- Rutström, E. Elisabet & Wilcox, Nathaniel T., 2009. "Stated beliefs versus inferred beliefs: A methodological inquiry and experimental test," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 67(2), pages 616-632, November.
- Vuong, Quang H, 1989. "Likelihood Ratio Tests for Model Selection and Non-nested Hypotheses," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 57(2), pages 307-333, March.
- Avery, Robert B & Hansen, Lars Peter & Hotz, V Joseph, 1983. "Multiperiod Probit Models and Orthogonality Condition Estimation," International Economic Review, Department of Economics, University of Pennsylvania and Osaka University Institute of Social and Economic Research Association, vol. 24(1), pages 21-35, February.
- Glenn Harrison & Morten Lau & Elisabet Rutstrom, 2004.
"Estimating risk attitudes in denmark: A field experiment,"
Artefactual Field Experiments
00059, The Field Experiments Website.
- Glenn W. Harrison & Morten I. Lau & E. Elisabet Rutström, 2007. "Estimating Risk Attitudes in Denmark: A Field Experiment," Scandinavian Journal of Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 109(2), pages 341-368, 06.
- Metrick, Andrew, 1995. "A Natural Experiment in "Jeopardy!"," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 85(1), pages 240-253, March.
- John List & David Reiley, 2008.
Artefactual Field Experiments
00091, The Field Experiments Website.
- Cary Deck & Jungmin Lee & Javier Reyes, 2008. "Risk attitudes in large stake gambles: evidence from a game show," Applied Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 40(1), pages 41-52.
- Joseph Yassour & David Zilberman & Gordon C. Rausser, 1981.
"Optimal Choices among Alternative Technologies with Stochastic Yield,"
American Journal of Agricultural Economics,
Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 63(4), pages 718-723.
- Yassour, Joseph & Zilberman, David D. & Rausser, Gordon C., 1980. "Optimal choices among alternative technologies with stochastic yield," Department of Agricultural & Resource Economics, UC Berkeley, Working Paper Series qt0gt334fc, Department of Agricultural & Resource Economics, UC Berkeley.
- Botti Fabrizio & Conte Anna & Di Cagno Daniela Teresa & D'Ippoliti Carlo, 2008.
"Risk Attitude in Real Decision Problems,"
The B.E. Journal of Economic Analysis & Policy,
De Gruyter, vol. 8(1), pages 1-32, March.
- Bellemare, C. & Kroger, S. & van Soest, A.H.O., 2008.
"Measuring inequity aversion in a heterogeneous population using experimental decisions and subjective probabilities,"
Other publications TiSEM
f17bda32-98f9-4580-ab3f-6, Tilburg University, School of Economics and Management.
- Charles Bellemare & Sabine Kröger & Arthur van Soest, 2008. "Measuring Inequity Aversion in a Heterogeneous Population Using Experimental Decisions and Subjective Probabilities," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 76(4), pages 815-839, 07.
- Pavlo Blavatskyy & Ganna Pogrebna, 2010. "Endowment effects? “Even” with half a million on the table!," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 68(1), pages 173-192, February.
- Train,Kenneth E., 2009.
"Discrete Choice Methods with Simulation,"
Cambridge University Press, number 9780521766555, December.
- Robert Gertner, 1993. "Game Shows and Economic Behavior: Risk-Taking on "Card Sharks"," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, Oxford University Press, vol. 108(2), pages 507-521.
- Peter Moffatt & Simon Peters, 2001. "Testing for the Presence of a Tremble in Economic Experiments," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 4(3), pages 221-228, December.
- Thierry Post & Martijn J. van den Assem & Guido Baltussen & Richard H. Thaler, 2008. "Deal or No Deal? Decision Making under Risk in a Large-Payoff Game Show," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 98(1), pages 38-71, March.
- Charles A. Holt & Susan K. Laury, 2002. "Risk Aversion and Incentive Effects," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 92(5), pages 1644-1655, December.
- Manski, Charles F., 2002. "Identification of decision rules in experiments on simple games of proposal and response," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 46(4-5), pages 880-891, May.
- Glenn Harrison & E. Rutström, 2009. "Expected utility theory and prospect theory: one wedding and a decent funeral," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 12(2), pages 133-158, June.
- Benjamin Tabak, 2009. "Testing the expectations hypothesis in the Brazilian term structure of interest rates: a cointegration analysis," Applied Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 41(21), pages 2681-2689.
- Hey, John D & Orme, Chris, 1994. "Investigating Generalizations of Expected Utility Theory Using Experimental Data," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 62(6), pages 1291-1326, November.
- Friend, Irwin & Blume, Marshall E, 1975. "The Demand for Risky Assets," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 65(5), pages 900-922, December.
When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:hal:journl:hal-00718703. 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: (CCSD)
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.