IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/mag/wpaper/120025.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Quantum Risk Preferences in a Laboratory Experiment

Author

Listed:
  • Lora R. Todorova

    () (Faculty of Economics and Management, Otto-von-Guericke University Magdeburg)

Abstract

This paper presents a quantum model of risk preferences that seeks to provide an explanation of the experimental results reported in Berninghaus, Todorova & Vogt (2012). The finding that subjects choose the risk-dominant strategy in a 2× 2 coordination game, on the average, more often, when they have previously completed a risk questionnaire, is not anticipated by the standard economic theory. The model presented in this paper demonstrates that the coordination game and the risk questionnaire can be analyzed as two decisions situations that do not commute and predicts that the order in which decisions are made will influence behavioral choices.

Suggested Citation

  • Lora R. Todorova, 2012. "Quantum Risk Preferences in a Laboratory Experiment," FEMM Working Papers 120025, Otto-von-Guericke University Magdeburg, Faculty of Economics and Management.
  • Handle: RePEc:mag:wpaper:120025
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.fww.ovgu.de/fww_media/femm/femm_2012/2012_25.pdf
    File Function: First version, 2011
    Download Restriction: no

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Ariane Lambert Mogiliansky & Shmuel Zamir & Herve Zwirn, 2003. "Type Indeterminacy: A Model of the KT(Kahneman-Tversky)-man," Discussion Paper Series dp343, The Federmann Center for the Study of Rationality, the Hebrew University, Jerusalem.
    2. 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.
    3. Bostic, Raphael & Herrnstein, R. J. & Luce, R. Duncan, 1990. "The effect on the preference-reversal phenomenon of using choice indifferences," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 13(2), pages 193-212, March.
    4. Starmer, Chris & Sugden, Robert, 1989. "Probability and Juxtaposition Effects: An Experimental Investigation of the Common Ratio Effect," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 2(2), pages 159-178, June.
    5. Camerer, Colin F, 1989. "An Experimental Test of Several Generalized Utility Theories," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 2(1), pages 61-104, April.
    6. John C. Hershey & Paul J. H. Schoemaker, 1985. "Probability Versus Certainty Equivalence Methods in Utility Measurement: Are they Equivalent?," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 31(10), pages 1213-1231, October.
    7. Siegfried K. Berninghaus & Lora R. Todorova & Bodo Vogt, 2012. "How Sensitive is Strategy Selection in Coordination Games?," FEMM Working Papers 120020, Otto-von-Guericke University Magdeburg, Faculty of Economics and Management.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    More about this item

    Keywords

    quantum mechanics; uncertain preferences; coordination game; risk; questionnaire;

    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:mag:wpaper:120025. 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: (Guido Henkel). General contact details of provider: http://edirc.repec.org/data/fwmagde.html .

    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 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.

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service hosted by the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis . RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.