Correo Electrónico
DNINFOA - SIA
Bibliotecas
Convocatorias
Identidad U.N.
Publicado
Las preferencias individuales y sus determinantes. Un análisis de las preferencias sobre el riesgo y el tiempo
Individual preferences and their determinants: An assessment over risk and time preferences
Preferências individuais e seus determinantes. Uma análise das preferências de risco e tempo
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.15446/cuad.econ.v40n83.82098Palabras clave:
aversión al riesgo, elicitación de preferencias, preferencias individuales, tasa de descuento (es)discount rate, individual preferences, elicitation of preferences, risk aversion (en)
aversão ao risco, elicitação de preferências, preferências individuais, taxa de desconto (pt)
El riesgo y el tiempo constituyen elementos centrales en el análisis económico, sobre los cuales típicamente se establecen supuestos predefinidos. Amplia evidencia experimental demuestra que estas preferencias no son exógenas, de modo que su heterogeneidad merece ser considerada en la modelización del comportamiento. Este artículo presenta evidencia con respecto a los factores determinantes y el grado de correlación de las preferencias individuales en ambos dominios: el riesgo y el tiempo, en un contexto de países en vías de desarrollo. El análisis involucra mecanismos experimentales de elicitación de preferencias, con constructos psicológicos y medidas autorreportadas.
Risk and time are transversal elements in the economic analysis, over which specific predefined assumptions are determined. On the contrary, extensive experimental evidence shows that these preferences are not exogenous, and their heterogeneity deserves to be determined in the modelling of behaviour. This paper presents evidence regarding the determinants of individual preferences in both domains: risk and time, in a context of developing countries. The analysis involves experimental mechanisms to elicit preferences with psychological constructs and self-reported measures.
O risco e o tempo são elementos centrais na análise econômica, sobre a qual normalmente são feitas suposições predefinidas. Extensas evidências experimentais mostram que essas preferências não são exógenas, portanto, sua heterogeneidade merece ser considerada na modelagem comportamental. Este artigo apresenta evidências sobre os fatores determinantes e o grau de correlação das preferências individuais em ambos os domínios: risco e tempo, no contexto de um país em desenvolvimento. A análise envolve mecanismos experimentais de elicitação de preferências, com construtos psicológicos e medidas autorreferidas.
Referencias
Andersen, S., Harrison, G. W., Lau, M. I., & Rutström, E. E. (2008). Eliciting risk and time preferences. Econometrica, 76(3), 583-618. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-0262.2008.00848.x
Andreoni, J., & Sprenger, C. (2012). Risk preferences are not time preferences. American Economic Review, 102(7), 3357-3376. http://dx.doi.org/10.1257/aer.102.7.3357
Barr, A., & Packard, T. (2000). Revealed and concealed preferences in the Chilean pension system: An experimental investigation (Economics Series Working Papers 53). https://ideas.repec.org/p/oxf/wpaper/53.html
Ben, A., William, D., Gray, A., & Dudley, J. (2014). The Darwin Awards: Sex differences in idiotic behaviour (BMJ 2014;349:g7094). https://www.bmj.com/content/349/bmj.g7094
Benhabib, J., Bisin, A., & Schotter, A. (2010). Present-bias, quasi-hyperbolic discounting, and fixed costs. Games and Economic Behavior, 69(2), 205-223. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.geb.2009.11.003
Brañas, P., Jorrat, D., Espín, A. M., & Sánchez, A. (2020a). Paid and hypothetical time preferences are the same: Lab, field and online evidence (MPRA Paper 103660). https://ideas.repec.org/p/pra/mprapa/103660.html
Brañas, P., Estepa, L., Jorrat, D., Orozco, V., & Rascon, E. (2020b). To pay or not to pay: Measuring risk preferences in lab and field (MPRA Paper 103088). https://ideas.repec.org/p/pra/mprapa/103088.html
Camerer, C., & Hogarth, R. (1999). The effects of financial incentives in experiments. A review and capital-labor-production framework. Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, 19(1-3), 7-42.
Charness, G., Gneezy, U., & Imas, A. (2013). Experimental methods: Eliciting risk preferences. Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, 87(C), 43-51.
Chen, D. L., Schonger, M., & Wickens, C. (2016). oTree—An opensource platform for laboratory, online, and field experiments. Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Finance, 9, 88-97. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbef.2015.12.001
Checchi, D., Fiorio, C. V., & Leonardi, M. (2014). Parents’ risk aversion and children’s educational attainment. Labour Economics, 30, 164-175. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.labeco.2014.04.001
Cohen, J. D., Ericson, K., Laibson, D., & White, J. M. (2016). Measuring time preferences (NBER Working Paper 22455). https://econpapers.repec.org/paper/nbrnberwo/22455.htm
Coller, M., & Williams, M., (1999). Eliciting individual discount rates. Experimental Economics, 2, 107-127 (1999). https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1009986005690
Crosetto, P., & Filippin, A. (2013). The “bomb” risk elicitation task. Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, 47(1), 31-65.
Dave, C., Eckel, C. C., Johnson, C. A., & Rojas, C. (2010). Eliciting risk preferences: When is simple better? Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, 41(3), 219-243. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11166-010-9103-z
Dohmen, T., Falk, A., Huffman, D., Sunde, U., Schupp, J., & Wagner, G. (2005). Individual risk attitudes. New evidence from a large, representative, experimentally validated survey (IZA Discussion Paper 1730). https://econpapers.repec.org/paper/izaizadps/dp1730.htm
Dohmen, T., Huffman, D., Schupp, J., Falk, A., Sunde, U., & Wagner, G. G. (2011). Individual risk attitudes: Measurement, determinants, and behavioural consequences. Journal of the European Economic Association, 9(3), 522-550.
Eckel, C. C., & Grossman, P. J. (2008). Men, women and risk aversion: Experimental evidence (SSRN Scholarly Paper 1883693). https://papers.ssrn.com/abstract=1883693
Falk, A., Becker, A., Dohmen, T., Huffman, D., & Sunde, U., (2016). The preference survey module: A validated instrument for measuring risk, time, and social preferences (IZA Discussion Paper 9674). https://www.iza.org/publications/dp/9674/the-preference-survey-module-a-validatedinstrument-for-measuring-risk-time-and-social-preferences
Falk, A., Becker, A., Dohmen, T., Enke, B., Huffman, D., & Sunde, U., (2018). Global evidence on economic preferences. The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 133(4),1645-1692.
Greiner, B., (2015). Subject pool recruitment procedures: Organizing experiments with ORSEE. Journal of the Economic Science Association, 1, 114-125. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40881-015-0004-4
Harrison, G. W., Lau, M., Rutström, E. E., & Sullivan, M. B. (2005a). Eliciting Risk and Time preferences using field experiments: Some methodological issues. Research in Experimental Economics, 10, 125-218.
Harrison, G., Humphrey, S., & Verschoor, A. (2005b). Choice under uncertainty in developing countries (Discussion Papers 2005-18). The Centre for Decision Research and Experimental Economics. https://ideas.repec.org/p/cdx/dpaper/2005-18.html
Haushofer, J., & Fehr, E. (2014). On the psychology of poverty. Science, 344(6186), 862-867. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1232491
Holcomb, J. H., & Nelson, P. S. (1992). Another experimental look at individual time preference. Rationality and Society, 4(2), 199-220. https://doi.org/10.1177/1043463192004002006
Holt, C., & Laury, S. (2002). Risk aversion and incentive effects. The American Economic Review, 92(5), 1644-1655.
Holzmeister, F., & Pfurtscheller, A. (2016). oTree: The “bomb” risk elicitation task. Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Finance, 10, 105-108.
Johnson, J., & Powell, P. (1994). Decision making, risk and gender: Are managers different? British Journal of Management, 5, 123-138.
Kanbuir, R., & Lyn, S., (2001). Gender differences in perception of risk associated with alcohol and drug use among college students. Women Health, 20, 87-97.
Knack, S., & Keefer, P. (1997). Does social capital have an economic payoff? A cross-country investigation. The Quarterly Journal of Economics 112(4), 1251-1288.
Kremer, M., Rao. V., & Schilbach, F. (2019). Behavioral development economics. En D. Bernheim, S. DellaVigna & D. Laibson (eds.), Handbook of Behavioral Economics (vol. 2, pp. 345-458). Oxford: North Holland - Elsevier. https://doi.org/10.1016/bs.hesbe.2018.12.002
Liu, E. (2012). Time to change what to sow. Risk preferences and technology adoption decisions of cotton farmers in China. The Review of Economics and Statistics, 95, 1386-1403.
Loewenstein, G., & Prelec, D., (1992). Anomalies in intertemporal choice: Evidence and interpretation. Quarterly Journal of Economics, 107, 573-597. https://www.jstor.org/stable/2118482?seq=1
Manzini, P., & Mariotti, M. (2007). Choice over time (IZA Discussion Paper 2993). https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1012547
Mazur, J. (1987). An adjusting procedure for studying delayed reinforcement. En J. Mazur, J. Nevin & H. Rachlin (eds.), Quantitative analyses of behavior: The effect of delay and of intervening events on reinforcement value (vol. 5, pp. 55-73). Hillsdal: Erlbaum.
Mullainathan, S., & Eldar S. (2013.) Scarcity: Why having too little means so much. Nueva York: Henry Holt & Company.
Schilbach, F., Schofield, H., & Mullainathan S., (2016). Psychological lives of the poor. American Economic Review, 106(5), 435-440.
Schubert, R., Brown, M., Gysler, M., & Brachinger, H. W. (1999). Financial decision-making: Are women really more risk-averse? The American Economic Review, 89(2), 381-385.
Sunde, U., Dohmen, T., Enke, B., Falk, A., & Huffman, D. (2018). Patience and comparative development (Technical Report, Working Paper). https://www.iame.uni-bonn.de/people/thomas-dohmen/patience-and-comparative-development-paper
Tabellini, G., (2010). Culture and institutions: Economic development in the regions of Europe. Journal of the European Economic Association 8(4), 677-716.
Tanaka, T., Camerer, C. F., & Nguyen, Q. (2010). Risk and time preferences: Linking experimental and household survey data from Vietnam. American Economic Review, 100(1), 557-571.
Thaler, R. (1981). Some empirical evidence on dynamic inconsistency. Economics Letters, 8(3), 201-207. https://doi.org/10.1016/0165-1765(81)90067-7
Cómo citar
APA
ACM
ACS
ABNT
Chicago
Harvard
IEEE
MLA
Turabian
Vancouver
Descargar cita
CrossRef Cited-by
1. Jose G. Castillo, Manuel A. Hernandez. (2022). The Unintended Consequences of Confinement: Evidence From the Rural Area in Guatemala. SSRN Electronic Journal , https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.4156693.
2. Jose Gabriel Castillo, Manuel A. Hernandez. (2023). The unintended consequences of confinement: Evidence from the rural area in Guatemala. Journal of Economic Psychology, 95, p.102587. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joep.2022.102587.
Dimensions
PlumX
Visitas a la página del resumen del artículo
Descargas
Licencia
Derechos de autor 2021 Cuadernos de EconomíaCuadernos de Economía a través de la División de Bibliotecas de la Universidad Nacional de Colombia promueve y garantiza el acceso abierto de todos sus contenidos. Los artículos publicados por la revista se encuentran disponibles globalmente con acceso abierto y licenciados bajo los términos de Creative Commons Atribución-No_Comercial-Sin_Derivadas 4.0 Internacional (CC BY-NC-ND 4.0), lo que implica lo siguiente:
