Zum Hauptinhalt springen Skip to page footer

Messung der Risikoneigung

Ibrahim Filiz, Thomas Nahmer, Markus Spiwoks and Zulia Gubaydullina

sofia Diskussionsbeiträge 2018, No. 1 https://doi.org/10.46850/sofia.9783941627659

Bisherige Verfahren zur Ermittlung der Risikoneigung (risikoavers, risikoneutral oder risikoliebend) weisen einige Schwächen auf. Sie sind zum Teil so komplex und anspruchsvoll, dass man von den Probanden häufig spontane, unüberlegte Antworten erhält. Dadurch kann die tatsächliche Risikoneigung häufig nicht zutreffend  ermittelt  werden.  Darüber  hinaus  gibt  es  bei  diesen  Verfahren  Konstellationen, in denen keine eindeutige Zuordnung zu den drei Kategorien der  Risikoneigung  möglich  ist.  Außerdem  wird bei  den  bisherigen Ansätzen  die  Verlustaversion  als  wichtiger  Einfluss  auf  die  Risikoneigung  nicht  oder  nicht ausreichend berücksichtigt. Wir schlagen ein neues Verfahren zur Ermittlung der Risikoneigung vor, das (1) extrem einfach und überschaubar ist, das (2) eine eindeutige Unterscheidung von risikoaversen, risikoneutralen und risikoliebenden Wirtschaftssubjekten erlaubt und das (3) den Einfluss der Verlust-aversion auf die Risikoneigung angemessen berücksichtigt.

Access full article

References

  1. Agnew, J., Balduzzi, P., Sunden, A.: Portfolio Choice and Trading in a Large 401(k) Plan. American Econ. Rev. 93(1), 193-215 (2003). DOI: https://doi.org/10.1257/000282803321455223.
  2. Anderson, A.: Trading and Under-Diversification. Rev. Finance 17(5), 1-43 (2013). DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/rof/rfs044.
  3. Baltussen, G., Post, G.T.: Irrational Diversification: an Examination of Individual Portfolio Choice. J. Financ. Quant. Anal. 46(5), 1463-1491 (2011). DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/S002210901100041X.
  4. Barber, B.M., Odean, T.: Trading is Hazardous to your Wealth: The Common Stock Investment Performance of Individual Investors. J. Finance 55(2), 773-806 (2000). DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/0022-1082.00226.
  5. Bechara, A., Damasio, A.R., Damasio, H., Anderson, S.W.: Insensitivity to future consequences following damage to human prefrontal cortex. Cognition 50, 7-15 (1994). DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/0010-0277(94)90018-3.
  6. Benartzi, S.: Excessive Extrapolation and the Allocation of 401(k) Accounts to Company Stock. J. Finance 56(5), 1747-1764 (2001). DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/0022-1082.00388.
  7. Benartzi, S., Thaler, R.H.: Naïve Diversification Strategies in Defined Contribution Saving Plans. American Econ. Rev. 91(1), 79-98 (2001). DOI: https://doi.org/10.1257/aer.91.1.79.
  8. Benndorf, V., Rau, H.A., Sölch, C.: Minimizing Learning Behavior in Experiments with Repeated Real-Effort Tasks. Düsseldorf Institute for Competition Economics (Sept. 2014). DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2503029.
  9. Blume, M.E., Friend, I.: The Asset Structure of Individual Portfolios and Some Implications for Utility Functions. J. Finance 30(2), 585-603 (1975). DOI: https://doi.org/10.2307/2978737.
  10. Bode, M., Van Echelpoel, A., Sievi, C.R.: Multinationale Diversifikation: Viel zitiert, kaum befolgt. Die Bank 94(4), 202-206 (1994).
  11. Charness, G., Eckel, C., Gneezy, U.: Complexity in risk elicitation may the conclusions: A demonstration using gender differences. Journal of Risk and Uncertainty 56, 1-17 (2018). DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11166-018-9274-6.  
  12. Charness, G., Gneezy, U., Imas, A.: Experimental methods: Eliciting risk preferences. Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization 87, 43-51 (2013). DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jebo.2012.12.023.
  13. Charness, G., Viceisza, A.: Comprehension und risk elicitation in the field: evidence from rural Senegal, mimeo (2011).
  14. Choi, J.J., Laibson, D., Madrian, B.C., Metrick, A.: For Better or For Worse: Default Effects and 401(k) Savings Behavior. In: Wise, D.A.: Perspectives in the Economics of Aging, 81-121. University of Chicago Press (2004). DOI: https://doi.org/10.7208/chicago/9780226903286.003.0003.
  15. Crosetto, P., & Filippin, A.: The ’bomb’ risk elicitation task. Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, 47(1), 31–65 (2013). DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11166-013-9170-z.
  16. Dave, C., Eckel, C.C., Johnson, C.A., Rojas, C.: Eliciting risk preferences: when is simple better? Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, 41 (3), 219–243 (2010). DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11166-010-9103-z.
  17. Dimmock, S., G., Kouwenberg, R., Mitchell, O., S., Peijnenburg, K.: Ambiguity aversion and household portfolio choice puzzles: Empirical evidence. Journal of Financial Economics 119, 59-577 (2016). DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jfineco.2016.01.003.
  18. Eckel, C.C., Grossman, P.J.: Sex differences und statistical stereotyping in attitudes toward financial risk. Evolution und Human Behavior, 23(4), 281–295 (2002). DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/S1090-5138(02)00097-1.
  19. Eckel, C.C., Grossman, P.J.: Forecasting risk attitudes: an experimental study using actual und forecast gamble choices. Journal of Economic Behavior und Organization 68(1), 1–17 (2008). DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jebo.2008.04.006.
  20. Erkal, N., Gangadharan, L., Nikiforakis, N.: Relative Earnings und Giving in a Real-Effort Experiment. American Economic Review 101, 3330-3348 (2011). DOI: https://doi.org/10.1257/aer.101.7.3330.
  21. Eyster, E., Weizsäcker, G.: Correlation Neglect in Financial Decision Making. Discussion Paper, Deutsches Institut für Wirtschaftsforschung, Berlin (2011). DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.1735339.
  22. Fehr, E., Goette, L.: Do Workers Work More if Wages Are High? Evidence from a Randomized Field Experiment. American Economic Review 97, 298-317 (2007). DOI: https://doi.org/10.1257/aer.97.1.298.
  23. Fernandes, D.: The 1/N Rule Revisited: Heterogeneity in the Naïve Diversification Bias. International J. Res. Market. 30(3), 310-313 (2013). DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijresmar.2013.04.001.
  24. Filiz, I., Nahmer, T., Spiwoks, M., Bizer, K.: Portfolio Diversification: The Influence of Herding, Status-Quo Bias and the Gambler`s Fallacy. Financial Markets and Portfolio Management, forthcoming, (2018). DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11408-018-0311-x.
  25. Fischbacher, U., z-Tree: Zurich toolbox for ready-made economic experiments. Experimental Economics, 10(2), 171–178, (2007). DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10683-006-9159-4.
  26. Gneezy, U., Potters, J.: An experiment on risk taking und evaluation periods. Quarterly Journal of Economics 112(2), 631–645 (1997). DOI: https://doi.org/10.1162/003355397555217.
  27. Goetzmann, W.N., Kumar, A.: Equity Portfolio Diversification. Rev. Finance12(3), 433-463 (2008). DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/rof/rfn005.
  28. Gubaydullina, Z., SpiwoKS, M.: Correlation Neglect, Naïve Diversification, and Irrelevant Information as Stumbling Blocks for Optimal Diversification. J. Finance Invest. Anal. 4 (2), 1-19 (2015).
  29. Guiso, L., Haliassos, M., Japelli, T.: Household Portfolios. MIT Press, Cam-bridge, Massachusetts (2002). DOI: https://doi.org/10.7551/mitpress/3568.001.0001.
  30. Hedesstrom, T.M., Svedsater, H., Garling, T.: Covariation Neglect among Novice Investors. J. Experimental Psychology-App. 12(3), 155-165 (2006). DOI: https://doi.apa.org/doi/10.1037/1076-898X.12.3.155.
  31. Hibbert, A.M., Lawrence, E.R., Prakash, A.J.: Can Diversification Be Learned? J. Behav. Finance 13 (1), 38-50 (2012). DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/15427560.2012.654547.
  32. Holt, C.A., Laury, S.K.: Risk aversion und incentive effects. American Eco-nomic Review 92(5), 1644–1655 (2002). DOI: https://doi.org/10.1257/000282802762024700.
  33. Huberman, G., Sengmueller, P.: Performance and Employer Stock in 401(k) Plans. Rev. Finance 8(3), 403-443 (2004). DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10679-004-2544-y.
  34. Filiz, I.: Overconfidence: Der Einfluss positiver und negativer Effekte. Sofia Diskussionsbeiträge zur Institutionenanalyse, Nr. 17-1 (2018).
  35. Jacobsen, S., Petrie, R.: Learning from mistakes: what do inconsistent choices over risk tell us? Journal of Risk and Uncertainty 38(2), 143–158 (2009). DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11166-009-9063-3.
  36. Kahneman, D.: Thinking, Fast and Slow. London (2011).
  37. Kallir, I., Sonsino, D.: The Neglect of Correlation in Allocation Decisions. Southern Econ. J. 75(4), 1045-1066 (2009).
  38. Lease, R.C., Lewellen, W.G., Schlarbaum, G.G.: The Individual Investor: Attributes and Attitudes. J. Finance 29 (2), 413-433 (1974). DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-6261.1974.tb03055.x.
  39. Lejuez, C.W., Read, J.P., Kahler, C.W., Richards, J.B., Ramsey, S.E., Stuart, G.L., Strong, D.R. et al.: Evaluation of a behavioral measure of risk taking: the Balloon Analogue Risk Task (BART). Journal of Experimental Psychology: Applied 8(2), 75–84 (2002). DOI: https://doi.apa.org/doi/10.1037/1076-898X.8.2.75.
  40. Lönnqvist, J.E., Verkasalo, M., Walkowitz, G., Wichardt, P.C.: Measuring individual risk attitudes in the lab: task or ask? An empirical comparison. Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization 119, 254-266 (2015). DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jebo.2015.08.003.
  41. Markowitz, H.: Portfolio Selection. The Journal of Finance 7(1), 77-91 (March 1952). DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-6261.1952.tb01525.x.
  42. Meulbroek, L.: Company Stock in Pension Plans: how costly is it?. J. Law Econ. 48(2), 443-474 (2005). DOI: https://doi.org/10.1086/430807.
  43. Morrin, M., Inman, J.J., Broniarczyk, S.M., Nenkov, G.Y., Reuter, J.: Investing for Retirement: The Moderating Effect of Fund Assortment Size on the 1/N Heuristic. J. Market. Res. 49(4), 537-550 (2012). DOI: https://doi.org/10.1509%2Fjmr.08.0355.
  44. Mukherjee, S., Pammi, V.S., Sahay, A., Srinivasan, N.: Is loss-aversion magnitude-dependent? Measuring prospective affective judgments regarding gains and losses. Judgment and Decision Making 12(1), 81–89 (2017).
  45. Polkovnichenko, V.: Household Portfolio Diversification: a Case for Rank-dependent Preferences. Rev. Financ. Stud. 18(4), 1467-1502 (2005). DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/rfs/hhi033.
  46. Prelec, D., Simester, D.: Always leave home without it: a further investigation of the credit-card effect on willingness to pay. Marketing letters 12 (1), 5–12 (2001). DOI: https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1008196717017.
  47. Rabin, M: Risk aversion und expected-utility theory: A calibration theorem, Econometrica 68, 1281-1293 (2000). DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/1468-0262.00158.
  48. Rieger, M.O.: Why Do Investors Buy Bad Financial Products? Probability Misestimation and Preferences in Financial Investment Decision. J. Behav. Finance 13(2), 108-118 (2012). DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/15427560.2012.680991.
  49. Runnemark, E., Hedman, J., Xiao, X.: Do consumers pay more using debit cards than cash? Electronic Commerce Research and Applications 14(5), 285-291 (2015). DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.elerap.2015.03.002.
  50. Schupp, J., Wagner, G. G.: Maintenance of and Innovation in Long-Term Panel Studies. The Case of the German Socio-Economic Panel (GSOEP). Allgemeines Statistisches Archiv 86, 163–175, (2002).
  51. Thaler, R.H., Johnson, E.J.: Gambling with the House Money and Trying to Break Even: The Effects of Prior Outcomes on Risky Choice. Management Science 36(6), 643-660 (1990). DOI: https://doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.36.6.643.
  52. Thomas, M., Kaushik Desai, K., Seenivasan, S.: (2011). How credit card payments increase unhealthy food purchases: visceral regulation of vices. Journal of consumer research 38, 126–139 (2011). DOI: https://doi.org/10.1086/657331.
  53. Tom, S.M., Fox, C.R., Trepel, C., Poldrack, A.R.: The Neural Basis of Loss Aversion in Decision-Making Under Risk. Science 315, 515-518 (2007). DOI: https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1134239.
  54. Wagner, G. G., Burkhauser, R. V., Behringer, F.: The English Language Public Use File of the German Socio-Economic Panel. The Journal of Human Resources 28, 429–433 (1993).
  55. Weber, E.U., Blais, A.R., Betz, N.E.: A domain-specific risk-attitude scale: measuring risk perceptions und risk behaviors. Journal of Behavioral Decision Making 15(4), 263–290 (2002). DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/bdm.414.
  56. Weber, E.U., Siebenmorgen, N., Weber, M.: Communication Asset Risk: How Name Recognition and the Format of Historic Volatility Information Affect Risk Perception and Investment Decisions. Risk Anal. 25(3), 597-609 (2005). DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1539-6924.2005.00627.x.
  57. Zuckermann, M.: Sensation Seeking: Beyond the Optimal Level of Arousal. Erlbaum, Hillsdale, N.J. (1979).
  58. Zuckermann, M.: Behavioral Expressions and Biosocial Bases of Sensation Seeking. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge (1994).