Journal of Risk and Uncertainty

, Volume 58, Issue 1, pp 71–100 | Cite as

Measuring ambiguity preferences: A new ambiguity preference survey module

  • Elisa Cavatorta
  • David SchröderEmail author


Ambiguity preferences are important to explain human decision-making in many areas in economics and finance. To measure individual ambiguity preferences, the experimental economics literature advocates using incentivized laboratory experiments. Yet, laboratory experiments are costly, time-consuming and require substantial administrative effort. This study develops an experimentally validated ambiguity preference survey module that can reliably measure ambiguity preferences when carrying out laboratory experiments is impractical. This toolkit may have wide applications, including end-of-session lab questionnaires, large scale surveys and financial client assessments.


Ambiguity Preference measurement Decision making Experimental economics Survey validation 

JEL Classifications

C81 C83 C91 D81 



We thank the editor Kip Viscusi and an anonymous referee for their constructive comments. We also thank Johannes Abeler, Aurelien Baillon, Han Bleichrodt, Syngjoo Choi, Peter Dürsch, Roy Kouwenberg, Daniel Martin, Ron Smith, Uwe Sunde, Matthias Sutter, Jean-Marc Tallon, Stefan Trautmann, Peter Wakker, Matthias Wibral, seminar participants at Paris-1, as well as conference participants at IMEBESS, the Maastricht behavioral and experimental economics symposium, FUR XVI, Verein für Socialpolitik, ESRC Workshop on Preferences and Personality, NIBS, D-TEA, and the Royal Economic Society conference for helpful discussion and comments. This work was supported by a BEI research grant by Birkbeck College. Any remaining errors are ours.

Supplementary material

11166_2019_9299_MOESM1_ESM.pdf (197 kb)
(PDF 197 KB)


  1. Abdellaoui, M., Baillon, A., Placido, L., Wakker, P.P. (2011). The rich domain of uncertainty: Source functions and their experimental implementation. American Economic Review, 101(2), 695–723.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Bade, S. (2015). Randomization devices and the elicitation of ambiguity-averse preferences. Journal of Economic Theory, 159, 221–235.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Baillon, A., Wakker, L., Cabantous, P.P. (2012). Aggregating imprecise or conflicting beliefs: an experimental investigation using modern ambiguity theories. Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, 44(2), 115–147.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Baillon, A., & Bleichrodt, H. (2015). Testing ambiguity models through the measurement of probabilities for gains and losses. American Economic Journal: Microeconomics, 7(2), 77–100.Google Scholar
  5. Baillon, A., Huang, Z., Selin, A., Wakker, P.P. (2018). Measuring ambiguty attitudes for all (natural) events. Econometrica, 86(5), 1839–1858.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Becker, G.M., DeGroot, M.H., Marschak, J. (1964). Measuring utility by a single-response sequential method. Behavioral Science, 9(3), 226–232.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Bernard, T., Dercon, S., Orkin, K., Taffesse, A. (2014). The future in mind: Aspirations and forward-looking behaviour in rural Ethiopia. London: Centre for Economic Policy Research.Google Scholar
  8. Bianchi, M, & Tallon, J.-M. (2018). Ambiguity preferences and portfolio choice: Evidence from the field. Management Science.Google Scholar
  9. Binmore, K., Stewart, L., Voorhoeve, A. (2012). How much ambiguity aversion? Finding indifferences between Ellsberg’s risky and ambiguous bets. Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, 45(3), 215–238.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Bossaerts, P., Ghirardato, P., Guarnaschelli, S., Zame, W.R. (2010). Ambiguity in asset markets: Theory and experiment. Review of Financial Studies, 23 (4), 1325–1359.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Budner, S. (1962). Intolerance for ambiguity as a personal variable. Journal of Personality, 30, 29–50.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Butler, J.V., Guiso, L., Jappelli, T. (2014). The role of intuition and reasoning in driving aversion to risk and ambiguity. Theory and Decision, 77, 455–484.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Camerer, C, & Weber, M. (1992). Recent developments in modeling preferences. Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, 5(4), 325–370.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Carbone, E., Dong, X., Hey, J. (2017). Elicitation of preferences under ambiguity. Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, 54(2), 87–102.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Chakravarty, S, & Roy, J. (2009). Recursive expected utility and the separation of attitudes towards risk and ambiguity: An experimental study. Theory and Decision, 66(3), 199–228.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Chang, E.C., Maydeu-Olivares, A., D’Zurilla, T. (1997). Optimism and pessimism as partially independent constructs: Relationship to positive and negative affectivity and psychological well-being. Personality and Individual Differences, 23 (3), 433–440.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Charness, G., Karni, E., Levin, D. (2013). Ambiguity attitudes and social interactions. Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, 46, 1–25.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Chateauneuf, A., Eichberger, J., Grant, S. (2007). Choice under uncertainty with the best and worst in mind: Neo-additive capacities. Journal of Economic Theory, 137, 538–567.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Chew, S.H., & Sagi, J.S. (2006). Event exchangeability: Probabilistic sophistication without continuity or monotonicity. Econometrica, 74(3), 771–786.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Chow, C.C., & Sarin, R.K. (2002). Known, unknown, and unknowable uncertainties. Theory and Decision, 52, 127–138.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Cohen, M, Jaffray, J.-Y., Said, T. (1987). Experimental comparison of individual behavior under risk and under uncertainty for gains and for losses. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 39(1), 1–22.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Cohen, M., Tallon, J.-M., Vergnaud, J.-C. (2011). An experimental investigation of imprecision attitude and its relation with risk attitude and impatience. Theory and Decision, 71(1), 81–110.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Cole, S., Giné, X., Tobacman, J., Townsend, R., Topalova, P., Vickery, J. (2013). Barriers to household risk management: Evidence from India. American Economic Journal: Applied Economics, 5(1), 104.Google Scholar
  24. Collard, F., Mukerji, S., Sheppard, K., Tallon, J.-M. (2018). Ambiguity and the historical equity premium. Quantitative Economics, 9, 945–993.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Curley, S.P., & Yates, J.F. (1989). An empirical evaluation of descriptive models of ambiguity reactions in choice situations. Journal of Mathematical Psychology, 33 (4), 397–427.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Dimmock, S.G., Kouwenberg, R., Mitchell, O.S., Peijnenburg, K. (2015). Estimating ambiguity preferences and perceptions in multiple prior models: Evidence from the field. Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, 51(3), 219–244.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Dimmock, S.G., Kouwenberg, R., Mitchell, O.S., Peijnenburg, K. (2016a). Ambiguity aversion and household portfolio choice puzzles: Empirical evidence. Journal of Financial Economics, 119(3), 559–577.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Dimmock, S.G., Kouwenberg, R., Wakker, P.P. (2016b). Ambiguity attitudes in a large representative sample. Management Science, 62(5), 1363–1380.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Dohmen, T., Falk, A., Huffman, D., Sunde, U., Schupp, J., Wagner, G.G. (2011). Individual risk attitudes: Measurement, determinants and behavioral consequences. Journal of the European Economic Association, 9(3), 522–550.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Donkers, B., Melenberg, B., Van Soest, A. (2001). Estimating risk attitudes using lotteries: A large sample approach. Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, 22(2), 165–195.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Dow, J. , & Da Costa Werlang, S.R. (1992). Uncertainty aversion, risk aversion, and the optimal choice of portfolio. Econometrica, 60(1), 197–204.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Ellsberg, D. (1961). Risk, ambiguity and the savage axioms. Quarterly Journal of Economics, 75(4), 643–669.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 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. Working paper.Google Scholar
  34. Falk, A., & Zimmermann, F. (2017). Consistency as a signal of skills. Management Science, 63(7), 2197–2210.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Falk, A., Becker, A., Dohmen, T., Enke, B., Huffman, D., Sunde, U. (2018). Global evidence on economic preferences. Quarterly Journal of Economics, 133(4), 1645–1692.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Fehr, E., Fischbacher, U., Rosenbladt, B., Schupp, J., Wagner, G. (2003). A nationwide laboratory: Examining trust and trustworthiness by integrating behavioural experiments into representative surveys. Working paper.Google Scholar
  37. Festinger, L. (1957). A theory of cognitive dissonance. Stanford: Stanford University Press.Google Scholar
  38. Fischbacher, U. (2007). z-tree: Zurich toolbox for ready-made economic experiments. Experimental Economics, 10(2), 171–178.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Fox, C.R., & Tversky, A. (1995). Ambiguity aversion and comparative ignorance. Quarterly Journal of Economics, 110(3), 585–603.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Furnham, A., & Ribchester, T. (1995). Tolerance of ambiguity: A review of the concept, its measurement and applications. Current Psychology, 14(3), 179–199.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Greco, V., & Roger, D. (2001). Coping with uncertainty: The construction and validation of a new measure. Personality and Individual Differences, 31, 519–534.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Guiso, L., & Paiella, M. (2008). Risk aversion, wealth and background risk. Journal of the European Economic Association, 6(6), 1109–1150.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Guiso, L, & Jappelli, T. (2008). Financial literacy and portfolio diversification. Working paper.Google Scholar
  44. Heath, C., & Tversky, A. (1991). Preference and belief: Ambiguity and competence in choice under uncertainty. Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, 4(1), 5–28.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Holt, C.A., & Laury, S.K. (2002). Risk aversion and incentive effects. American Economic Review, 92(5), 1644–1655.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Kirton, M. J. (1981). A reanalysis of two scales of tolerance of ambiguity. Journal of Personality Assessment, 45(4), 407–414.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Knight, F.H. (1921). Risk, uncertainty, and profit. Boston: Houghton Mifflin Company.Google Scholar
  48. Kocher, M.G., Lahno, A.M., Trautmann, S.T. (2015). Ambiguity aversion is the exception. Working paper.Google Scholar
  49. Lauriola, M, & Levin, I.P. (2001). Relating individual differences in attitude toward ambiguity to risky choices. Journal of Behavioral Decision Making, 14(2), 107–122.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. MacDonald Jr., A. P. (1970). Revised scale for ambiguity tolerance: Reliability and validity. Psychological Reports, 26, 791–798.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. McLain, D.L. (2009). Evidence of the properties of an ambiguity tolerance measure: The multiple stimulus types ambiguity tolerance scale-II (mstat-II). Psychological Reports, 105(3), 975–988.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Nishimura, K.G., & Ozaki, H. (2004). Search and Knightian uncertainty. Journal of Economic Theory, 119(2), 299–333.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Nishimura, K.G., & Ozaki, H. (2007). Irreversible investment and Knightian uncertainty. Journal of Economic Theory, 136(1), 668–694.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Norton, R.W. (1975). Measurement of ambiguity tolerance. Journal of Personality Assessment, 39(6), 607–619.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Robins, R.W., Hendin, H.M., Trzesniewski, K.H. (2001). Measuring global self-esteem: Construct validation of a single-item measure and the Rosenberg self-esteem scale. Personality and Social Bulletin, 27(2), 151–161.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Rydell, S.T., & Rosen, E. (1966). Measurement and some correlates of need cognition. Psychological Reports, 19, 139–165.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. Sutter, M., Kocher, M.G., Glätzle-Rüetzler, D., Trautmann, S.T. (2013). Impatience and uncertainty: Experimental decisions predict adolescents’ field behavior. The American Economic Review, 103(1), 510–531.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Tibshirani, R. (1996). Regression shrinkage and selection via the lasso. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society, Series B (Methodological), 58(1), 267–288.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. Trautmann, S.T., & van de Kuilen, G. (2016). Ambiguity Attitudes. Blackwell Handbook of Judgment and Decision Making. Malden: Blackwell Publishing.Google Scholar
  60. Vieider, F.M., Lefebvre, M., Bouchouicha, R., Chmura, T., Hakimov, R., Krawczyk, M., Martinsson, P. (2015). Common components of risk and uncertainty attitudes across contexts and domains: Evidence from 30 countries. Journal of the European Economic Association, 13(3), 421–452.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. Weitzman, M.L. (2009). On modeling and interpreting the economics of catastrophic climate change. Review of Economics and Statistics, 91(1), 1–19.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.King’s College LondonUniversity of LondonStrandUK
  2. 2.Birkbeck CollegeUniversity of LondonBloomsburyUK

Personalised recommendations