Preference intensities and risk aversion in school choice: a laboratory experiment

We experimentally investigate in the laboratory two prominent mechanisms that are employed in school choice programs to assign students to public schools. We study how individual behavior is influenced by preference intensities and risk aversion. Our main results show that (a) the Gale-Shapley mechanism is more robust to changes in cardinal preferences than the Boston mechanism independently of whether individuals can submit a complete or only a restricted ranking of the schools and (b) subjects with a higher degree of risk aversion are more likely to play "safer" strategies under the Gale-Shapley but not under the Boston mechanism. Both results have important implications for the efficiency and the stability of the mechanisms.

Stochastic dominance and absolute risk aversion

In this paper we proose the infimum of the Arrow-Pratt index of absoluterisk aversion as a measure of global risk aversion of a utility function.We then show that, for any given arbitrary pair of distributions, thereexists a threshold level of global risk aversion such that all increasingconcave utility functions with at least as much global risk aversion wouldrank the two distributions in the same way. Furthermore, this thresholdlevel is sharp in the sense that, for any lower level of global riskaversion, we can find two utility functions in this class yielding oppositepreference relations for the two distributions.

Does risk aversion or attraction depend on income? An experiment

Does risk attitude (aversion or attraction) vary with the level of the income at risk? About half of our subjects chose to insure all levels, whereas another half chose instead not to insure low levels, but to insure high levels.

Measuring risk aversion with lists: A new bias

Various experimental procedures aimed at measuring individual risk aversion involve alist of pairs of alternative prospects. We first study the widely used method by Holt andLaury (2002), for which we find that the removal of some items from the lists yields asystematic decrease in risk aversion. This bias is quite distinct from other confoundsthat have been previously observed in the use of the Holt and Laury method. It may berelated to empirical phenomena and theoretical developments where better prospectsincrease risk aversion. Nevertheless, we have also found that the more recent elicitationmethod due to Abdellaoui et al. (2011), also based on lists, does not display anystatistically significant bias when the corresponding items of the list are removed. Ourresults suggest that methods other than the popular Holt and Laury one may bepreferable for the measurement of risk aversion.

Risk aversion and embedding bias

In Selten (1967) ?Strategy Method,? the second mover in the game submits a complete strategy. This basic idea has been exported to nonstrategic experiments, where a participant reports a complete list of contingent decisions, one for each situation or state in a given sequence, out of which one and only one state, randomly selected, will be implemented.In general, the method raises the following concern. If S0 and S1 are two differentsequences of states, and state s is in both S0 and S1, would the participant make the same decision in state s when confronted with S0 as when confronted with S1? If not, the experimental results are suspect of suffering from an ?embedding bias.?We check for embedding biases in elicitation methods of Charles Holt and Susan Laury(Laury and Holt, 2000, and Holt and Laury, 2002), and of the present authors (Bosch-Dom?nech and Silvestre, 1999, 2002, 2006a, b) by appropriately chosen replications of the original experiments. We find no evidence of embedding bias in our work. But in Holt and Laury?s method participants tend to switch earlier to the riskier option when later pairs of lotteries are eliminated from the sequence, suggesting the presence of some embedding bias.

A Survey Measure of Risk Aversion

We Use Survey Data on the Well-Being of Individuals to Measure Attitude Toward Risk. Risk Neutrality Cannot Be Rejected by the Data.

Risk Aversion, Intertemporal Substitution, and Option Pricing

This paper develops a general stochastic framework and an equilibrium asset pricing model that make clear how attitudes towards intertemporal substitution and risk matter for option pricing. In particular, we show under which statistical conditions option pricing formulas are not preference-free, in other words, when preferences are not hidden in the stock and bond prices as they are in the standard Black and Scholes (BS) or Hull and White (HW) pricing formulas. The dependence of option prices on preference parameters comes from several instantaneous causality effects such as the so-called leverage effect. We also emphasize that the most standard asset pricing models (CAPM for the stock and BS or HW preference-free option pricing) are valid under the same stochastic setting (typically the absence of leverage effect), regardless of preference parameter values. Even though we propose a general non-preference-free option pricing formula, we always keep in mind that the BS formula is dominant both as a theoretical reference model and as a tool for practitioners. Another contribution of the paper is to characterize why the BS formula is such a benchmark. We show that, as soon as we are ready to accept a basic property of option prices, namely their homogeneity of degree one with respect to the pair formed by the underlying stock price and the strike price, the necessary statistical hypotheses for homogeneity provide BS-shaped option prices in equilibrium. This BS-shaped option-pricing formula allows us to derive interesting characterizations of the volatility smile, that is, the pattern of BS implicit volatilities as a function of the option moneyness. First, the asymmetry of the smile is shown to be equivalent to a particular form of asymmetry of the equivalent martingale measure. Second, this asymmetry appears precisely when there is either a premium on an instantaneous interest rate risk or on a generalized leverage effect or both, in other words, whenever the option pricing formula is not preference-free. Therefore, the main conclusion of our analysis for practitioners should be that an asymmetric smile is indicative of the relevance of preference parameters to price options.

Risk Aversion in Inventory Management

Traditional inventory models focus on risk-neutral decision makers, i.e., characterizing replenishment strategies that maximize expected total profit, or equivalently, minimize expected total cost over a planning horizon. In this paper, we propose a framework for incorporating risk aversion in multi-period inventory models as well as multi-period models that coordinate inventory and pricing strategies. In each case, we characterize the optimal policy for various measures of risk that have been commonly used in the finance literature. In particular, we show that the structure of the optimal policy for a decision maker with exponential utility functions is almost identical to the structure of the optimal risk-neutral inventory (and pricing) policies. Computational results demonstrate the importance of this approach not only to risk-averse decision makers, but also to risk-neutral decision makers with limited information on the demand distribution.

A comparison of three different models for estimating relative risk in meta-analysis of clinical trials under unobserved heterogeneity

We focus on the comparison of three statistical models used to estimate the treatment effect in metaanalysis when individually pooled data are available. The models are two conventional models, namely a multi-level and a model based upon an approximate likelihood, and a newly developed model, the profile likelihood model which might be viewed as an extension of the Mantel-Haenszel approach. To exemplify these methods, we use results from a meta-analysis of 22 trials to prevent respiratory tract infections. We show that by using the multi-level approach, in the case of baseline heterogeneity, the number of clusters or components is considerably over-estimated. The approximate and profile likelihood method showed nearly the same pattern for the treatment effect distribution. To provide more evidence two simulation studies are accomplished. The profile likelihood can be considered as a clear alternative to the approximate likelihood model. In the case of strong baseline heterogeneity, the profile likelihood method shows superior behaviour when compared with the multi-level model. Copyright (C) 2006 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Effects of presenting the baseline risk when communicating absolute and relative risk reductions

This study compares relative and absolute forms of presenting risk information about influenza and the need for vaccination. It investigates whether differences in people's risk estimates and their evaluations of risk information, as a result of the different presentation formats, are still apparent when they are provided with information about the baseline level of risk. The results showed that, in the absence of baseline information, the relative risk format resulted in higher ratings of satisfaction, perceived effectiveness of vaccination, and likelihood of being vaccinated. However, these differences were not apparent when baseline information was presented. Overall, provision of baseline information resulted in more accurate risk estimates and more positive evaluations of the risk messages. It is recommended that, in order to facilitate shared and fully informed decision making, information about baseline level of risk should be included in all health communications specifying risk reductions, irrespective of the particular format adopted.

Expressing medicine side effects: assessing the effectiveness of absolute risk, relative risk, and number needed to harm, and the provision of baseline risk information

Objective: To assess the effectiveness of absolute risk, relative risk, and number needed to harm formats for medicine side effects, with and without the provision of baseline risk information. Methods: A two factor, risk increase format (relative, absolute and NNH) x baseline (present/absent) between participants design was used. A sample of 268 women was given a scenario about increase in side effect risk with third generation oral contraceptives, and were required to answer written questions to assess their understanding, satisfaction, and likelihood of continuing to take the drug. Results: Provision of baseline information significantly improved risk estimates and increased satisfaction, although the estimates were still considerably higher than the actual risk. No differences between presentation formats were observed when baseline information was presented. Without baseline information, absolute risk led to the most accurate performance. Conclusion: The findings support the importance of informing people about baseline level of risk when describing risk increases. In contrast, they offer no support for using number needed to harm. Practice implications: Health professionals should provide baseline risk information when presenting information about risk increases or decreases. More research is needed before numbers needed to harm (or treat) should be given to members of the general populations. (c) 2005 Elsevier Ireland Ltd. All rights reserved.

Accounting for risk aversion in repeated prisoners’ dilemma games: an experimental test

We apply experimental methods to study the role of risk aversion on players’ behavior in repeated prisoners’ dilemma games. Faced with quantitatively equal discount factors, the most risk-averse players will choose Nash strategies more often in the presence of uncertainty than when future profits are discounted in a deterministic way. Overall, we find that risk aversion relates negatively with the frequency of collusive outcomes.

Risk aversion, overconfidence and private information as determinants of majority thresholds

We present and experimentally test a theoretical model of majority threshold determination as a function of voters’ risk preferences. The experimental results confirm the theoretical prediction of a positive correlation between the voter's risk aversion and the corresponding preferred majority threshold. Furthermore, the experimental results show that a voter's preferred majority threshold negatively relates to the voter's confidence about how others will vote. Moreover, in a treatment in which individuals receive a private signal about others’ voting behaviour, the confidence-related motivation of behaviour loses ground to the signal's strength.