The role of information search and its influence on risk preferences

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

9 Scopus citations

Abstract

According to the ‘Description–Experience gap’ (DE gap), when people are provided with the descriptions of risky prospects they make choices as if they overweight the probability of rare events; but when making decisions from experience after exploring the prospects’ properties, they behave as if they underweight such probability. This study revisits this discrepancy while focusing on information-search in decisions from experience. We report findings from a lab-experiment with three treatments: a standard version of decisions from description and two versions of decisions from experience: with and without a ‘history table’ recording previously sampled events. We find that people sample more from lotteries with rarer events. The history table proved influential; in its absence search is more responsive to cues such as a lottery’s variance while in its presence the cue that stands out is the table’s maximum capacity. Our analysis of risky choices captures a significant DE gap which is mitigated by the presence of the history table. We elicit probability weighting functions at the individual level and report that subjects overweight rare events in experience but less so than in description. Finally, we report a measure that allows us to compare the type of DE gap found in studies using choice patterns with that inferred through valuation and find that the phenomenon is similar but not identical across the two methods.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)311-339
Number of pages29
JournalTheory and Decision
Volume84
Issue number3
DOIs
StatePublished - 1 May 2018
Externally publishedYes

Keywords

  • Cumulative prospect theory
  • Decisions from description
  • Decisions from experience
  • Information search
  • Risk preferences
  • Source method
  • Uncertainty

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'The role of information search and its influence on risk preferences'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this