Do the Wealthy Risk More Money? An Experimental Comparison

  • Antoni Bosch-Domènech
  • Joaquim Silvestre
Part of the Studies in Economic Theory book series (ECON.THEORY, volume 25)


Are poor people more or less likely to take money risks than wealthy folks? We find that risk attraction is more prevalent among the wealthy when the amounts of money at risk are small (not surprising, since ten dollars is a smaller amount for a wealthy person than for a poor one), but, interestingly, for the larger amounts of money at risk the fraction of the nonwealthy displaying risk attraction actually exceeds that of the wealthy. We also replicate our previous finding that many people display risk attraction for small money amounts, but risk aversion for large ones.

Key words

Risk attraction Risk aversion Wealth Experiments 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    Armantier, Olivier (forthcoming) “Does wealth affect fairness considerations?” International Economic Review.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Arrow, Kenneth (1965) Aspects of the Theory of Risk Bearing, Yrjo Jahnsson Lectures, Helsinki: The Academic Bookstore.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Arrow, Kenneth (1970) Essays in the Theory of Risk Bearing, Amsterdam: North Holland.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Barsky, Robert B., F. Thomas Juster, Miles S. Kimball and Matthew Shapiro (1997) “Preference parameters and behavioral heterogeneity: An experimental approach in the health and retirement study,” Quarterly Journal of Economics, 112, 537–79.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Beetsma, Roel, and Peter Schotman (2001) “Measuring risk attitudes in a natural experiment: Data from the television game show Lingo,” Economic Journal, 111, 821–848.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Binswanger, Hans (1980) “Attitudes toward risk: Experimental measurement in rural India,” American Journal of Agricultural Economics 62, 395–407.Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Bosch-Domènech, Antoni, and Joaquim Silvestre (1999) “Does risk aversion or attraction depend on income? An experiment,” Economics Letters 65, 265–273.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Bosch-Domènech, Antoni, and Joaquim Silvestre (2005) “Reflections on gains and losses: A 2×2×7 experiment,” mimeo.Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Cancian, Frank (1972) Change and Uncertainty in a Peasant Economy: The Maya Corn Farmers of Zinacantan, Stanford: Stanford University Press.Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Cárdenas, Juan-Camilo (2003) “Real wealth and experimental cooperation: Experiments in the field lab,” Journal of Development Economics 70(2), 263–289.Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Cohen, Michele, Jean-Yves Jaffray and Tanios Said (1985) “Individual behavior under risk and under uncertainty: An experimental study,” Theory and Decision 18, 203–228.CrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Dee, Thomas S., and William N. Evans (2001) “Teens and traffic safety,” in Gruber (2001).Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Dillon, John L., and Pasquale L. Scandizzo (1978) “Risk attitudes of subsistence farmers in Northeast Brazil: A sampling approach,” American Journal of Agricultural Economics 60, 425–435.Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Donkers, Bas, Bertrand Melenberg and Arthur Van Hoest (2001) “Estimating risk attitudes using lotteries: A large sample approach,” Journal of Risk and Uncertainty 22(2), 165–195.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Eckel, Catherine, and Philip J. Grossman (forthcoming) “Differences in the economic decisions of men and women: Experimental evidence,” in Charles Plott and Vernon Smith, Editors, Handbook Results in Experimental Economics, New York: Elsevier.Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Friedman, Milton, and Leonard J. Savage (1948) “The utility analysis of choices involving risk,” Journal of Political Economy 56(4), 279–304.Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Gneezy, Uri, and Jan Potters (1997) “An experiment on risk taking and evaluation periods,” The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 631–661.Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Gruber, Jonathan, Editor (2001) Risky Behavior among Youths: An Economic Analysis, Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Guiso, Luigi, and Monica Paiella (2001) “Risk aversion, wealth and background risk,” CEPR Discussion Paper No. 2728.Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Halek, Martin, and Joseph G. Eisenhauer (2001) “Demography of risk aversion,” Journal of Risk and Insurance 68(1), 1–24.Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Harbaugh, William T., Kate Krause and Lise Vesterlund (2002) “Risk attitudes of children and adults: choices over small and large probability gains and losses,” Experimental Economics 5, 53–84.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Henrich, Joseph, Robert Boyd, Samuel Bowles, Colin Camerer, Ernst Fehr, Herber Gintis and Richard McElreath (2001) “Cooperation, reciprocity and punishment in fifteen small-scale societies,” American Economic Review 91(2), 73–78.Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Henrich, Joseph, and Richard McElreath (2002) “Are peasants risk-averse decision makers?” Current Anthropology 43, 172–181.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Hogarth, Robin M., and Hillel J. Einhorn (1990) “Venture theory: A model of decision weights,” Management Science 3(7), 780–803.Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Holt, Charles A., and Susan K. Laury (2002) “Risk aversion and incentive effects,” American Economic Review 92,5, 1644–1655.Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Jullien, Bruno, and Bernard Salanié (2000) “Estimating preferences under risk: The case of racetrack bettors,” Journal of Political Economy, 108(3), 503–530.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Kachelmeier, Steven J., and Mohamed Shehata (1992) “Examining risk preferences under high monetary incentives: Experimental evidence from the People’s Republic of China,” American Economic Review 82(5), 1120–1141.Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    Kahneman, Daniel, and Amos Tversky (1979) “Prospect theory: An analysis of decision under risk,” Econometrica 47(2), 263–291.Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    Kuznar, Lawrence A. (2001) “Risk sensitivity and value among Andean pastoralists: Measures, models and empirical tests,” Current Anthropology 42(3), 432–440.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Levine, Phillip B. (2001) “The sexual activity and birth-control use of American teenagers,” in Gruber (2001).Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    Machina, Mark J. (1982) “ ‘Expected utility’ analysis without the independence axiom,” Econometrica 50(2), 277–324.zbMATHMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Pratt, John (1964) “Risk aversion in the small and the large,” Econometrica 32, 122–136.zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Preston, Malcolm G., and Philip Baratta (1948), “An experimental study of the auction value of an uncertain outcome,” American Journal of Psychology 61, 183–193.Google Scholar
  34. 34.
    Roth, Alvin E., Vesna Prasnikar, Masahiro Okuno-Fujiwara and Shmuel Zamir (1991) “Bargaining and market behavior in Jerusalem, Ljubljana, Pittsburgh and Tokyo: An experimental study,” American Economic Review 81, 1068–1095.Google Scholar
  35. 35.
    Schubert, Renate, Martin Brown, Matthias Gysler and Hans W. Brachinger (1999) “Financial decision making: Are women more risk averse?” American Economic Review 89(2), 381–385.Google Scholar
  36. 36.
    Shavit, Tal, Doron Sonsino and Uri Benzion (2001) “A comparative study of lotteries-Evaluation in class and on the web,” Journal of Economic Psychology 22(4), 483–491.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Starmer, Chris, and Robert Sugden (1991) “Does a random lottery incentive system elicit true preferences? An experimental investigation,” American Economic Review 81(4), 971–978.Google Scholar
  38. 38.
    Tversky, Amos, and Daniel Kahneman (1992) “Advances in prospect theory: Cumulative representation of uncertainty,” Journal of Risk and Uncertainty 5, 297–323.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2006

Authors and Affiliations

  • Antoni Bosch-Domènech
    • 1
  • Joaquim Silvestre
    • 2
  1. 1.Department of Economics and BusinessUniversitat Pompeu FabraBarcelonaSpain
  2. 2.Department of EconomicsUniversity of CaliforniaDavisUSA

Personalised recommendations