Social comparison and risk taking behavior

Abstract

Standard-Nutzungsbedingungen:Die Dokumente auf EconStor dürfen zu eigenen wissenschaftlichen Zwecken und zum Privatgebrauch gespeichert und kopiert werden.Sie dürfen die Dokumente nicht für öffentliche oder kommerzielle Zwecke vervielfältigen, öffentlich ausstellen, öffentlich zugänglich machen, vertreiben oder anderweitig nutzen.Sofern die Verfasser die Dokumente unter Open-Content-Lizenzen (insbesondere CC-Lizenzen) zur Verfügung gestellt haben sollten, gelten abweichend von diesen Nutzungsbedingungen die in der dort genannten Lizenz gewährten Nutzungsrechte. Abstract This paper studies the effects of social comparison on risk taking behavior. In our framework, decision makers evaluate the consequences of their choices as changes with respect to both their own and their peers' conditions. We test experimentally whether different positions in the social ranking determine different risk attitudes. Subjects interact in a simulated workplace environment, where they receive possibly different wages as compensation for effort and then undertake a risky decision that may give them an extra gain. We find that social comparison matters for risk attitudes. In addition, risk aversion decreases with the size of social gains. As a consequence, subjects are less risk averse in social loss than in small social gain, whereas their risk attitudes do not differ between social loss and large social gain. Terms of use: Documents in

Rankings and Risk-Taking in the Finance Industry

“…satisfaction v(·) from the comparison of her outcome with a social reference point s. 9 In our specification of social utility, we follow Gamba and Manzoni (2014) and Maccheroni et al (2014) and, for simplicity, assume that the monetary utility u(·) is not influenced by any reference point. 10 The investor's constrained optimization problem can thus be written as…”

“…It is obvious that γ affects the investor's optimal portfolio decision. Following Gamba and Manzoni (2014) and Maccheroni et al (2014), we assume that the social component v(·) is increasing in R p , which implies that the investor enjoys being above the social reference point and dislikes being below. The following proposition summarizes our first observation (see Appendix A for proofs of all propositions in the paper).…”

Exploring the risk-taking tendency among migrant workers in the COVID-19 pandemic: The role of ontological security

“…People with perceived ontology security scarcity experience anxiety and tend to seek different methods to regain their ontological security, such as seeking a stable residence [25] or reconstructing a regular life order [22,26]. Therefore, it is worth exploring the impact of the [36]. Previous studies believed that individuals first tended to upward social comparison, that means, compared with people with higher or better grades than their own: when the current status of the individual is consistent with the upward comparison goal, it will produce an assimilation effect, that means, the individual's self-worth will be improved; otherwise, it will produce a comparison effect, That is, individuals will produce negative self-evaluation [47].…”

Prospect Theory, Fairness, and the Escalation of Conflict at a Negotiation Impasse*

“…(2014), and Gamba et al . (2017) suggests that redistributive decision‐making under risk depends heavily on the context and auxiliary design attributes (Loewenstein et al ., 1989; Guala, 2005; List, 2007; Bardsley, 2008).…”