Showing 1 - 10 of 448
In this chapter, we discuss the “lab-in-the-field” methodology, which combines elements of both lab and field experiments in using standardized, validated paradigms from the lab in targeting relevant populations in naturalistic settings. We begin by examining how the methodology has been...
Persistent link: https://www.econbiz.de/10014023427
This chapter surveys the rapidly growing literature in which risk preferences are measured and manipulated in laboratory and field experiments. The most commonly used measurement instruments are: an investment task for allocations between a safe and risky asset, a choice menu task for eliciting...
Persistent link: https://www.econbiz.de/10014025528
In this paper, we first replicated Harrison et al. (2012). Then, we studied if the group’s size has an impact on group’s risk aversion. In line with Harrison et al. (2012), our results confirm that no significant differences occur between individuals and groups risk aversion in three-person...
Persistent link: https://www.econbiz.de/10011556337
For our experiment on corruption we designed a coordination game to model the influence of risk attitudes, beliefs, and information on behavioral choices and determined the equilibria. We observed that the participants' risk attitudes failed to explain their choices between corrupt and...
Persistent link: https://www.econbiz.de/10008654377
We report a controlled laboratory experiment examining risk-taking and information aggregation in groups facing a common risk. The experiment allows us to examine how subjects respond to new information, in the form of both privately observed signals and signals reported from others. We find...
Persistent link: https://www.econbiz.de/10010515798
In hierarchical organizations the role of a team leader often requires making decisions which do not necessarily coincide with the majority opinion of the team. However, these decisions are final and binding for all team members. We study experimentally why, and under which conditions, leaders...
Persistent link: https://www.econbiz.de/10009731792
We investigate experimentally the effect of consultation (unincentivized advice) on choices under risk in an incentivized investment task. We compare these choices to two benchmark treatments: one with isolated individual choices, and a second with group choice after communication. Our...
Persistent link: https://www.econbiz.de/10009689911
This paper examines the effect of peers on individual risk taking. In the absence of informational motives, we investigate why social utility concerns may drive peer effects. We test for two main channels: utility from payoff differences and from conforming to the peer. We show experimentally...
Persistent link: https://www.econbiz.de/10009691154
This paper examines the effect of peers on individual risk taking. In the absence of informational motives, we investigate why social utility concerns may drive peer effects. We test for two main channels: utility from payoff differences and from conforming to the peer. We show experimentally...
Persistent link: https://www.econbiz.de/10009720583
We investigate experimentally the effect of consultation (unincentivized advice) on choices under risk in an incentivized investment task. We compare consultation to two benchmark treatments: one with isolated individual choices, and a second with group choice after communication. Our benchmark...
Persistent link: https://www.econbiz.de/10009757008