IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/nbr/nberwo/14754.html

Risk Preferences in the PSID: Individual Imputations and Family Covariation

Author

Listed:
  • Miles S. Kimball
  • Claudia R. Sahm
  • Matthew D. Shapiro

Abstract

Survey measures of preference parameters provide a means for accounting for otherwise unobserved heterogeneity.This paper presents measures of relative risk tolerance based on responses to survey questions about hypothetical gambles over lifetime income.It discusses how to impute estimates of utility function parameters from the survey responses using a statistical model that accounts for survey response error. There is substantial heterogeneity in true preference parameters even after survey response error is taken into account.The paper discusses how to use the preference parameters imputed from the survey responses in regression models as a control for differences in preferences across individuals. This paper focuses on imputations for respondents in the Panel Study of Income Dynamics (PSID).It also studies the covariation of risk preferences among members of households.It finds fairly strong covariation in attitudes about risk -- between parents and children and especially between siblings and between spouses.

Suggested Citation

  • Miles S. Kimball & Claudia R. Sahm & Matthew D. Shapiro, 2009. "Risk Preferences in the PSID: Individual Imputations and Family Covariation," NBER Working Papers 14754, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    • Handle: RePEc:nbr:nberwo:14754
    Note: AP EFG ME
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.nber.org/papers/w14754.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Thomas Dohmen & Armin Falk & David Huffman & Uwe Sunde, 2012. "The Intergenerational Transmission of Risk and Trust Attitudes," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 79(2), pages 645-677.
    2. Miles S. Kimball & Matthew D. Shapiro, 2008. "Labor Supply: Are the Income and Substitution Effects Both Large or Both Small?," NBER Working Papers 14208, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    3. Kimball, Miles S & Sahm, Claudia R & Shapiro, Matthew D, 2008. "Imputing Risk Tolerance From Survey Responses," Journal of the American Statistical Association, American Statistical Association, vol. 103(483), pages 1028-1038.
    4. Ulrike Malmendier & Stefan Nagel, 2011. "Depression Babies: Do Macroeconomic Experiences Affect Risk Taking?," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 126(1), pages 373-416.
    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. Insoo Cho & Peter F. Orazem & Tanya Rosenblat, 2018. "Are Risk Attitudes Fixed Factors or Fleeting Feelings?," Journal of Labor Research, Springer, vol. 39(2), pages 127-149, June.
    2. Jonathan P. Beauchamp & David Cesarini & Magnus Johannesson, 2017. "The psychometric and empirical properties of measures of risk preferences," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 54(3), pages 203-237, June.
    3. Insoo Cho & Peter F. Orazem, 2021. "How endogenous risk preferences and sample selection affect analysis of firm survival," Small Business Economics, Springer, vol. 56(4), pages 1309-1332, April.
    4. Cardak, Buly A. & Martin, Vance L., 2023. "Household willingness to take financial risk: Stockmarket movements and life‐cycle effects," Journal of Banking & Finance, Elsevier, vol. 149(C).
    5. Claudia R. Sahm, 2012. "How Much Does Risk Tolerance Change?," Quarterly Journal of Finance (QJF), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 2(04), pages 1-38.
    6. Breitkopf, Laura & Chowdhury, Shyamal K. & Priyam, Shambhavi & Schildberg-Hörisch, Hannah & Sutter, Matthias, 2020. "Do economic preferences of children predict behavior?," DICE Discussion Papers 342, Heinrich Heine University Düsseldorf, Düsseldorf Institute for Competition Economics (DICE).
    7. Adamopoulou, Effrosyni & Olivieri, Elisabetta & Triviza, Eleftheria, 2024. "Eating habits, food consumption, and health: The role of early life experiences," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 166(C).
    8. John Ameriks & Gábor Kézdi & Minjoon Lee & Matthew D. Shapiro, 2020. "Heterogeneity in Expectations, Risk Tolerance, and Household Stock Shares: The Attenuation Puzzle," Journal of Business & Economic Statistics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 38(3), pages 633-646, July.
    9. Jetter, Michael & Magnusson, Leandro M. & Roth, Sebastian, 2020. "Becoming sensitive: Males’ risk and time preferences after the 2008 financial crisis," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 128(C).
    10. Liu, Xianda & Hou, Wenxuan & Main, Brian G.M., 2022. "Anti-market sentiment and corporate social responsibility: Evidence from anti-Jewish pogroms," Journal of Corporate Finance, Elsevier, vol. 76(C).
    11. Thomas Gomez & Giulia Piccillo, 2019. "Diverse Risk Preferences and Heterogeneous Expectations in an Asset Pricing Model," CESifo Working Paper Series 8003, CESifo.
    12. Leonardo M. Klüppel & Lamar Pierce & Jason A. Snyder, 2018. "Perspective—The Deep Historical Roots of Organization and Strategy: Traumatic Shocks, Culture, and Institutions," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 29(4), pages 702-721, August.
    13. Dahmann, Sarah C. & Kettlewell, Nathan & Lam, Jack, 2022. "Parental Separation and the Formation of Economic Preferences," IZA Discussion Papers 14993, IZA Network @ LISER.
    14. Claudia R. Sahm, 2007. "Stability of risk preference," Finance and Economics Discussion Series 2007-66, Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System (U.S.).
    15. Groero, Jaroslav, 2024. "The role of gene–environment interaction in the formation of risk attitudes," Economics & Human Biology, Elsevier, vol. 55(C).
    16. Sepahvand, Mohammad H & Shahbazian, Roujman & Bali Swain, Ranjula, 2018. "Does revolution change risk attitudes? Evidence from Burkina Faso," Working Paper Series 2019:2, Uppsala University, Department of Economics.
    17. Rainer Kotschy & Uwe Sunde, 2025. "Gender Gaps in Patience, Risk-Taking, Trust, and Prosociality Have Declined Across Birth Cohorts," CESifo Working Paper Series 12173, CESifo.
    18. Wang, Chuhong & Liu, Xingfei & Tani, Massimiliano & Zhao, Yan, 2025. "Safety nets and investment choices," Emerging Markets Review, Elsevier, vol. 68(C).
    19. Dohmen, Thomas & Lehmann, Hartmut & Pignatti, Norberto, 2016. "Time-varying individual risk attitudes over the Great Recession: A comparison of Germany and Ukraine," Journal of Comparative Economics, Elsevier, vol. 44(1), pages 182-200.
    20. Schwerter, Frederik & Zimmermann, Florian, 2020. "Determinants of trust: The role of personal experiences," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 122(C), pages 413-425.

    More about this item

    JEL classification:

    • C42 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Econometric and Statistical Methods: Special Topics - - - Survey Methods
    • D12 - Microeconomics - - Household Behavior - - - Consumer Economics: Empirical Analysis
    • D81 - Microeconomics - - Information, Knowledge, and Uncertainty - - - Criteria for Decision-Making under Risk and Uncertainty
    • E21 - Macroeconomics and Monetary Economics - - Consumption, Saving, Production, Employment, and Investment - - - Consumption; Saving; Wealth
    • J12 - Labor and Demographic Economics - - Demographic Economics - - - Marriage; Marital Dissolution; Family Structure

    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:nbr:nberwo:14754. 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: the person in charge (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/nberrus.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.