PL EN


Preferencje help
Widoczny [Schowaj] Abstrakt
Liczba wyników
2012 | 3 | nr 4 | 43--69
Tytuł artykułu

Interactions Between Demand for Self-Insurance and for Market Insurance

Autorzy
Warianty tytułu
Behawioralne determinanty zachowań uczestników gry koordynacyjnej - badanie pilotażowe
Języki publikacji
EN
Abstrakty
Celem tego pilotażowego badania było zbadanie zależności między szeregiem miar preferencji względem podejmowania ryzyka oraz zachowaniem w pierwszej rundzie tzw. staghunt game. Niniejszy raport prezentuje bardzo wczesne wyniki badań, które sugerują, że zachowanie w pierwszej rundzie gry nie może być wyjaśnione przy pomocy miar często stosowanych przez innych badaczy. Ponadto, autor opisuje relacje między miarami użytymi w eksperymencie. (abstrakt oryginalny)
EN
The aim of this pilot study is to investigate relationships between various riskattitude measures and players' behavior in the first-round of a repeated stag hunt game. This research report presents preliminary findings that the first-round behavior cannot be explained by any of the commonly used risk-elicitation instruments and describes relationships between those instruments. (original abstract)
Słowa kluczowe
Rocznik
Tom
3
Numer
Strony
43--69
Opis fizyczny
Twórcy
autor
  • Uniwersytet Gdański
Bibliografia
  • 1. Andrews, D. W. ., & Buchinsky, M. (2000). A Three-step Method for Choosing the Number of Bootstrap Repetitions. Econometrica, 68(1), 23-51.
  • 2. Ariely, D., & Norton, M. I. (2007). Psychology and experimental economics: A gap in abstraction. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 16(6), 336-339.
  • 3. Bala, V., & Goyal, S. (2000). A noncooperative model of network formation. Econometrica, 68(5), 1181-1229.
  • 4. Berg, J. E., Rietz, T. A., & Dickhaut, J. W. (2008). On the Performance of the Lottery Procedure for Controlling Risk Preferences. Handbook of Experimental Economics Results, 1, 1087-1097.
  • 5. Berninghaus, S. K., Ehrhart, K.-M., & Keser, C. (2002a). Conventions and Local Interaction Structures: Experimental Evidence. Games and Economic Behavior, 39(2), 177-205. doi:10.1006/game.2001.0897
  • 6. Blais, A. R., & Weber, E. (2006). A Domain-Specific Risk-Taking (DOSPERT) scale for adult populations. Judgment and Decision Making, Vol. 1, No. 1, 2006.
  • 7. Bollen, K., & Lennox, R. (1991). Conventional wisdom on measurement: A structural equation perspective. Psychological bulletin, 110(2), 305.
  • 8. Borghans, L., Duckworth, A. L., Heckman, J. J., & Ter Weel, B. (2008). The economics and psychology of personality traits. National Bureau of Economic Research Cambridge, Mass., USA.
  • 9. Dave, C., Eckel, C. C., Johnson, C. A., & Rojas, C. (2010). Eliciting risk preferences: When is simple better? Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, 1-25.
  • 10. Deck, C. A., Lee, J., Reyes, J. A., & Rosen, C. (2008). Measuring Risk Attitudes Controlling for Personality Traits. SSRN eLibrary.
  • 11. Devetag, G., & Ortmann, A. (2007). When and why? A critical survey on coordination failure in the laboratory. Experimental Economics, 10(3), 331-344. doi:10.1007/s10683- 007-9178-9
  • 12. Dohmen, T., & Falk, A. (2011). Performance Pay and Multidimensional Sorting: Productivity, Preferences, and Gender. American Economic Review, 101(2), 556-590. doi:10.1257/aer.101.2.556
  • 13. Dohmen, T., Falk, A., Huffman, D., & Sunde, U. (2008). The intergenerational transmission of risk and trust attitudes. CESifo working paper. May.
  • 14. Dohmen, T., Falk, A., Huffman, D., Sunde, U., Schupp, J., & Wagner, G. G. (2009). Individual risk attitudes: Measurement, determinants, and behavioral consequences. Journal of the European Economic Association.
  • 15. Eckel, C. C., & Grossman, P. J. (2002). Sex differences and statistical stereotyping in attitudes toward financial risk. Evolution and Human Behavior, 23(4), 281-295.
  • 16. Eckel, C. C., & Grossman, P. J. (2008). Men, women and risk aversion: Experimental evidence. Handbook of experimental economics results, 1, 1061-1073.
  • 17. Ellison, G. (1993). Learning, Local Interaction, and Coordination. Econometrica, 61(5), 1047-1071..
  • 18. Fischbacher, U. (2007). z-Tree: Zurich toolbox for ready-made economic experiments. Experimental Economics, 10(2), 171-178. doi:10.1007/s10683-006-9159-4
  • 19. Hanoch, Y., Johnson, J. G., & Wilke, A. (2006). Domain specificity in experimental measures and participant recruitment. Psychological Science, 17(4), 300.
  • 20. Harsanyi, J. C., & Selten, R. (1988). A general theory of equilibrium selection in games. MIT Press Books, 1, pp.342-343.
  • 21. Heinmann, F., Nagel, R., & Ockenfels, P. (2009). Measuring Strategic Uncertainty in Coordination Games. Review of Economic Studies, 76(1), 181-221. doi:10.1111/j.1467- 937X.2008.00512.x
  • 22. Holt, C. A., & Laury, S. K. (2002). Risk aversion and incentive effects. American Economic Review, 92(5), 1644-1655.
  • 23. Huyck, J. B. V., Battalio, R. C., & Beil, R. O. (1990). Tacit Coordination Games, Strategic Uncertainty, and Coordination Failure. The American Economic Review, 80(1), 234- 248.
  • 24. Jackson, M. O. (2008). Social and Economic Networks. Princeton University Press.
  • 25. Kosfeld, M. (2004). Economic networks in the laboratory: A survey. Review of Network Economics, 3(1), 2.
  • 26. Kranton, R. E., & Minehart, D. F. (2001). A theory of buyer-seller networks. American economic review, 485-508.
  • 27. Krupka, E., & Leider, S. (2011). Transmitting social norms in networks. (Working Paper).
  • 28. Morey, L.C. (2007). The Personality Assessment Inventory professional manual. Lutz, FL: Psychological Assessment Resources.
  • 29. Morris, S. (2000). Contagion. The Review of Economic Studies, 67(1), 57.
  • 30. Murphy, J. J., Dinar, A., Howitt, R. E., Rassenti, S. J., & Smith, V. L. (2000). The Design of"Smart"Water Market Institutions Using Laboratory Experiments. Environmental and Resource Economics, 17(4), 375-394.
  • 31. Myerson, R. B. (1977). Graphs and cooperation in games. Mathematics of Operations Research, 225-229.
  • 32. Neumann, & Vogt. (2009). Do Players' Beliefs or Risk Attitudes Determine The Equilibrium Selections in 2x2 Coordination Games? Otto-von-Guericke University Magdeburg, Faculty of Economics and Management. Retrieved from http://ideas.repec.org/p/mag/wpaper/09024.html
  • 33. Pennings, J. M. E., & Smidts, A. (2000). Assessing the Construct Validity of Risk Attitude. Management Science, 46(10), 1337-1348.
  • 34. Roberts, B. W. (2009). Back to the future: Personality and assessment and personality development. Journal of research in personality, 43(2), 137-145.
  • 35. Rohrmann, B. (1998). The risk notion - epistemological and empirical considerations; in: Stewart, M.G., & Melchers, R.E. (Eds.): Integrative risk assessment; Rotterdam: Balkema.
  • 36. Rousseau, J.-J. (1985). A Discourse on Inequality. Penguin Classics.
  • 37. Schechter, L. (2007). Traditional trust measurement and the risk confound: An experiment in rural Paraguay. Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, 62(2), 272-292. doi:10.1016/j.jebo.2005.03.006
  • 38. Weber, E. U., Blais, A.-R., & Betz, N. E. (2002). A domain-specific risk-attitude scale: measuring risk perceptions and risk behaviors. Journal of Behavioral Decision Making, 15(4), 263-290. doi:10.1002/bdm.414
  • 39. Zuniga, A., & Bouzas, A. (2005). Actitud hacia el riesgo y consume de alcohol de los adolescented. Working paper. Retrieved by Blais & Weber 2006 on July 17, 2006, from https://decisionsciences.columbia.edu/dospert/index.htp
Typ dokumentu
Bibliografia
Identyfikatory
Identyfikator YADDA
bwmeta1.element.ekon-element-000171216605

Zgłoszenie zostało wysłane

Zgłoszenie zostało wysłane

Musisz być zalogowany aby pisać komentarze.
JavaScript jest wyłączony w Twojej przeglądarce internetowej. Włącz go, a następnie odśwież stronę, aby móc w pełni z niej korzystać.