IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/nbr/nberwo/18743.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Ambiguity Aversion and Household Portfolio Choice: Empirical Evidence

Author

Listed:
  • Stephen G. Dimmock
  • Roy Kouwenberg
  • Olivia S. Mitchell
  • Kim Peijnenburg

Abstract

We test the relation between ambiguity aversion and five household portfolio choice puzzles: non- participation, low allocations to equity, home-bias, own-company stock ownership, and portfolio under- diversification. In a representative U.S. household survey, we measure ambiguity aversion using custom- designed questions based on Ellsberg urns. As theory predicts, ambiguity aversion is negatively associated with stock market participation, the fraction of financial assets in stocks, and foreign stock ownership, but positively related to own-company stock ownership. Conditional on stock ownership, ambiguity aversion is related to portfolio under-diversification, and during the financial crisis, ambiguity-averse respondents were more likely to sell stocks.

Suggested Citation

  • Stephen G. Dimmock & Roy Kouwenberg & Olivia S. Mitchell & Kim Peijnenburg, 2013. "Ambiguity Aversion and Household Portfolio Choice: Empirical Evidence," NBER Working Papers 18743, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    • Handle: RePEc:nbr:nberwo:18743
    Note: AG LS
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.nber.org/papers/w18743.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Mohammed Abdellaoui & Aurelien Baillon & Laetitia Placido & Peter P. Wakker, 2011. "The Rich Domain of Uncertainty: Source Functions and Their Experimental Implementation," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 101(2), pages 695-723, April.
    2. Chew, Soo Hong & Sagi, Jacob S., 2008. "Small worlds: Modeling attitudes toward sources of uncertainty," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 139(1), pages 1-24, March.
    3. Gilboa, Itzhak, 1987. "Expected utility with purely subjective non-additive probabilities," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 16(1), pages 65-88, February.
    4. Schmeidler, David, 1989. "Subjective Probability and Expected Utility without Additivity," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 57(3), pages 571-587, May.
    5. Luigi Guiso & Paola Sapienza & Luigi Zingales, 2008. "Trusting the Stock Market," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 63(6), pages 2557-2600, December.
    6. Craig R. Fox & Amos Tversky, 1995. "Ambiguity Aversion and Comparative Ignorance," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 110(3), pages 585-603.
    7. Lusardi, Annamaria & Mitchell, Olivia S., 2011. "Financial literacy around the world: an overview," Journal of Pension Economics and Finance, Cambridge University Press, vol. 10(4), pages 497-508, October.
    8. Peter Bossaerts & Paolo Ghirardato & Serena Guarnaschelli & William R. Zame, 2010. "Ambiguity in Asset Markets: Theory and Experiment," The Review of Financial Studies, Society for Financial Studies, vol. 23(4), pages 1325-1359, April.
    9. Stephen G. Dimmock & Roy Kouwenberg & Peter P. Wakker, 2016. "Ambiguity Attitudes in a Large Representative Sample," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 62(5), pages 1363-1380, May.
    10. Daniel Ellsberg, 1961. "Risk, Ambiguity, and the Savage Axioms," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 75(4), pages 643-669.
    11. Tversky, Amos & Wakker, Peter, 1995. "Risk Attitudes and Decision Weights," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 63(6), pages 1255-1280, November.
    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. Breunig, Christoph & Huck, Steffen & Schmidt, Tobias & Weizsäcker, Georg, 2021. "The Standard Portfolio Choice Problem in Germany," EconStor Open Access Articles and Book Chapters, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics, vol. 131(638), pages 2413-2446.
    2. Arrondel, Luc & Calvo-Pardo, Hector & Giannitsarou, Chryssi & Haliassos, Michael, 2022. "Informative social interactions," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 203(C), pages 246-263.
    3. Jim Engle-Warnick & Diego Pulido & Marine de Montaignac, 2016. "Trust, ambiguity, and financial decision-making," CIRANO Working Papers 2016s-44, CIRANO.
    4. Luisito Bertinelli & Arnaud Bourgain & Florian Léon, 2020. "Corruption and tax compliance: evidence from small retailers in Bamako, Mali," Applied Economics Letters, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 27(5), pages 366-370, March.
    5. Fulghieri, Paolo & Dicks, David, 2016. "Innovation Waves, Investor Sentiment, and Mergers," CEPR Discussion Papers 11082, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    6. Hussinger, Katrin & Pacher, Sebastian, 2019. "Information ambiguity, patents and the market value of innovative assets," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 48(3), pages 665-675.
    7. Jeleva, Meglena & Tallon, Jean-Marc, 2016. "Ambiguïté, comportements et marchés financiers," L'Actualité Economique, Société Canadienne de Science Economique, vol. 92(1-2), pages 351-383, Mars-Juin.
    8. Carpenter, Jeffrey & Hans Matthews, Peter & Robbett, Andrea, 2017. "Compensating differentials in experimental labor markets," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 69(C), pages 50-60.
    9. Briggs, Joseph & Cesarini, David & Lindqvist, Erik & Östling, Robert, 2021. "Windfall gains and stock market participation," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 139(1), pages 57-83.
    10. André Palma & Mohammed Abdellaoui & Giuseppe Attanasi & Moshe Ben-Akiva & Ido Erev & Helga Fehr-Duda & Dennis Fok & Craig Fox & Ralph Hertwig & Nathalie Picard & Peter Wakker & Joan Walker & Martin We, 2014. "Beware of black swans: Taking stock of the description–experience gap in decision under uncertainty," Marketing Letters, Springer, vol. 25(3), pages 269-280, September.
    11. Hu, Jinyan & Jiang, Mingming & Zhang, Bo, 2015. "Social Network, Financial Market Participation and Asset Allocation: Evidence from China," RIEI Working Papers 2015-06, Xi'an Jiaotong-Liverpool University, Research Institute for Economic Integration.
    12. Victor Stango & Jonathan Zinman, 2019. "We are all Behavioral, More or Less: Measuring and Using Consumer-level Behavioral Sufficient Statistics," NBER Working Papers 25540, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    13. Cecilia Boggio & Elsa Fornero & Henriette Prast & Jose Sanders, 2014. "Seven Ways to Knit Your Portfolio: Is Investor Communication Neutral?," CeRP Working Papers 140, Center for Research on Pensions and Welfare Policies, Turin (Italy).
    14. Antoniou, Constantinos & Harris, Richard D.F. & Zhang, Ruogu, 2015. "Ambiguity aversion and stock market participation: An empirical analysis," Journal of Banking & Finance, Elsevier, vol. 58(C), pages 57-70.
    15. Stephen Dimmock & Roy Kouwenberg & Olivia Mitchell & Kim Peijnenburg, 2015. "Estimating ambiguity preferences and perceptions in multiple prior models: Evidence from the field," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 51(3), pages 219-244, December.
    16. Enrico G. De Giorgi & Ola Mahmoud, 2016. "Diversification preferences in the theory of choice," Decisions in Economics and Finance, Springer;Associazione per la Matematica, vol. 39(2), pages 143-174, November.
    17. Boggio, C. & Fornero, E. & Prast, H.M. & Sanders, J., 2015. "Seven Ways to Knit Your Portfolio : Is Investor Communication Neutral?," Other publications TiSEM 81e1098a-af2d-4107-a298-a, Tilburg University, School of Economics and Management.
    18. Fulghieri, Paolo & Dicks, David, 2015. "Ambiguity, Disagreement, and Allocation of Control in Firms," CEPR Discussion Papers 10400, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    19. Zhong Chu & Zhengwei Wang & Jing Jian Xiao & Weiqiang Zhang, 2017. "Financial Literacy, Portfolio Choice and Financial Well-Being," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 132(2), pages 799-820, June.

    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. Junyi Chai & Zhiquan Weng & Wenbin Liu, 2021. "Behavioral Decision Making in Normative and Descriptive Views: A Critical Review of Literature," JRFM, MDPI, vol. 14(10), pages 1-14, October.
    2. Dimmock, Stephen G. & Kouwenberg, Roy & Mitchell, Olivia S. & Peijnenburg, Kim, 2016. "Ambiguity aversion and household portfolio choice puzzles: Empirical evidence," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 119(3), pages 559-577.
    3. Mohammed Abdellaoui & Horst Zank, 2023. "Source and rank-dependent utility," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 75(4), pages 949-981, May.
    4. Aurélien Baillon & Zhenxing Huang & Asli Selim & Peter P. Wakker, 2018. "Measuring Ambiguity Attitudes for All (Natural) Events," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 86(5), pages 1839-1858, September.
    5. Zhihua Li & Julia Müller & Peter P. Wakker & Tong V. Wang, 2018. "The Rich Domain of Ambiguity Explored," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 64(7), pages 3227-3240, July.
    6. Aurélien Baillon & Han Bleichrodt & Umut Keskin & Olivier l’Haridon & Chen Li, 2018. "The Effect of Learning on Ambiguity Attitudes," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 64(5), pages 2181-2198, May.
    7. Ali al-Nowaihi & Sanjit Dhami & Mengxing Wei, 2018. "Quantum Decision Theory and the Ellsberg Paradox," CESifo Working Paper Series 7158, CESifo.
    8. Craig Webb, 2015. "Piecewise additivity for non-expected utility," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 60(2), pages 371-392, October.
    9. Chen Li, 2017. "Are the poor worse at dealing with ambiguity?," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 54(3), pages 239-268, June.
    10. Ali al-Nowaihi & Sanjit Dhami, 2016. "The Ellsberg paradox: A challenge to quantum decision theory?," Discussion Papers in Economics 16/08, Division of Economics, School of Business, University of Leicester.
    11. Stephen G. Dimmock & Roy Kouwenberg & Peter P. Wakker, 2016. "Ambiguity Attitudes in a Large Representative Sample," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 62(5), pages 1363-1380, May.
    12. Mohammed Abdellaoui & Han Bleichrodt & Cédric Gutierrez, 2023. "Unpacking Overconfident Behavior When Betting on Oneself," Post-Print hal-04383402, HAL.
    13. Gul, Faruk & Pesendorfer, Wolfgang, 2015. "Hurwicz expected utility and subjective sources," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 159(PA), pages 465-488.
    14. Fox, Craig R. & Weber, Martin, 2002. "Ambiguity Aversion, Comparative Ignorance, and Decision Context," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 88(1), pages 476-498, May.
    15. Cédric Gutierrez & Emmanuel Kemel, 2021. "Measuring natural source dependence," Working Papers hal-03330409, HAL.
    16. Ilke Aydogan & Loic Berger & Valentina Bosetti & Ning Liu, 2018. "Three layers of uncertainty: an experiment," Working Papers 623, IGIER (Innocenzo Gasparini Institute for Economic Research), Bocconi University.
    17. Anna Maffioletti & Michele Santoni, 2019. "Emotion and Knowledge in Decision Making under Uncertainty," Games, MDPI, vol. 10(4), pages 1-28, September.
    18. Gary Charness & Edi Karni & Dan Levin, 2013. "Ambiguity attitudes and social interactions: An experimental investigation," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 46(1), pages 1-25, February.
    19. Ronald Klingebiel & Feibai Zhu, 2023. "Ambiguity aversion and the degree of ambiguity," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 67(3), pages 299-324, December.
    20. Michel Grabisch & Benjamin Monet & Vassili Vergopoulos, 2023. "Subjective expected utility through stochastic independence," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 76(3), pages 723-757, October.

    More about this item

    JEL classification:

    • C83 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Data Collection and Data Estimation Methodology; Computer Programs - - - Survey Methods; Sampling Methods
    • D14 - Microeconomics - - Household Behavior - - - Household Saving; Personal Finance
    • D81 - Microeconomics - - Information, Knowledge, and Uncertainty - - - Criteria for Decision-Making under Risk and Uncertainty
    • 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:nbr:nberwo:18743. 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.