Theory and Decision

, Volume 78, Issue 1, pp 153–170 | Cite as

Gender differences when subjective probabilities affect risky decisions: an analysis from the television game show Cash Cab

Research

Abstract

This study uses the television show Cash Cab as a natural experiment to investigate gender differences in decision making under uncertainty. As expected, men are much more likely to accept the end-of-game gamble than are women, but men and women appear to weigh performance variables differently when relying on subjective probabilities. At best men base their risky decisions on general aspects of their previous “good” play (not all of which is relevant at the time the decision is made) and at worst fail to condition their risky decisions on any of the relevant information available to them. In sharp contrast, women appear to consider all of the information available to them, including previous “poor” play as well as their most recent confident “good” play, which, by design, is likely the most relevant information to consider.

Keywords

Subjective probabilities Decision making under uncertainty Female/male decision making Cash Cab 

JEL Classification

D81 C93 L83 J16 

References

  1. Barsky, R. B., Juster, F. T., Kimball, M. S., & Shapiro, M. D. (1997). Preference parameters and behavioral heterogeneity: An experimental approach in the health and retirement study. Quarterly Journal of Economics, 112(2), 537–579.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Bliss, R. T., Potter, M. E., & Schwarz, C. (2012). Decision making and risk aversion in the cash cab. Journal of Economic Behavior and Organization, 84(1), 163–173.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Booij, A. S., van Praag, B. M. S., & van de Kuilen, G. (2010). A parametric analysis of prospect theory’s functionals for the general population. Theory and Decision, 68(1–2), 115–148.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Borghans, L., Golsteyn, B. H., Heckman, J. J., & Meijers, H. (2009). Gender differences in risk aversion and ambiguity aversion. Journal of the European Economic Association, 7(2–3), 649–658.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Brooks, R., Faff, R., Mulino, D., & Scheelings, R. (2009). Deal or no deal? That is the question: The impact of increasing stakes and framing effects on decision making under risk. International Review of Finance, 9(1/2), 27–50.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Bruhin, A., Fehr-Duda, H., & Epper, T. (2010). Risk and rationality: Uncovering heterogeneity in probability distortion. Econometrica, 78(4), 1375–1412.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Byrnes, J. P., Miller, D. C., & Schafer, W. D. (1999). Gender differences in risk taking: A meta-analysis. Psychological Bulletin, 125(5), 367–383.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Cohen, A., & Einav, L. (2007). Estimating risk preferences from deductible choice”. American Economic Review, 97(3), 745–788.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. De Roos, N., & Sarafidis, Y. (2010). Decision making under risk in deal or no deal. Journal of Applied Econometrics, 25(6), 987–1027.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Deck, C., Lee, J., & Reyes, J. (2008). Risk attitudes in large stake gambles: Evidence from a game show. Applied Economics, 40(1), 41–52.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 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
  12. Eckel, C. C., & Grossman, P. J. (2005). Differences in the economic decisions of men and women: Experimental evidence. In C. R. Plott & V. L. Smith (Eds.), Handbook of experimental economics results (Vol. 1, pp. 309–519). New York: Elsevier.Google Scholar
  13. Ellsberg, D. (1961). Risk, ambiguity, and the savage axioms. Quarterly Journal of Economics, 75(4), 643–669.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Ertac, S., & Gurdal, M. Y. (2012). Deciding to decide: Gender, leadership and risk-taking in groups. Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, 83(1), 24–30.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Fehr-Duda, H., De Gennaro, M., & Schubert, R. (2006). Gender, financial risk, and probability weights. Theory and Decision, 60(2–3), 283–313.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Finucane, M. L., Slovic, P., Mertz, C. K., Flynn, J., & Satterfield, T. A. (2000). Gender, race, and perceived risk: The ‘White Male’ effect. Healthy Risk & Society, 2(2), 159–172.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Flynn, J., Slovic, P., & Mertz, C. K. (1994). Gender, race, and perception of environmental health risks. Risk Analysis, 14(6), 1101–1108.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Fullenkamp, C., Tenorio, R., & Battalio, R. (2003). Assessing individual risk attitudes using field data from lottery games. Review of Economics and Statistics, 85(1), 218–226.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Gardner, M., & Steinberg, L. (2005). Peer influence on risk taking, risk preference, and risky decision making in adolescence and adulthood: An experimental study. Developmental Psychology, 41(4), 625–635.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Gertner, R. (1993). Game shows and economic behavior: Risk-taking on ‘card sharks’. Quarterly Journal of Economics, 108(2), 507–521.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Hersch, J. (1996). Smoking, seat belts and other risky consumer decisions: Differences by gender and race. Managerial and Decision Economics, 17(5), 471–481.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Hersch, P. L., & McDougall, G. S. (1997). Decision making under uncertainty when the stakes are high: Evidence from a lottery game show. Southern Economic Journal, 64(1), 75–84.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Hoelzl, E., & Rustichini, A. (2005). Overconfident: Do you put your money on it? Economic Journal, 115(503), 305–318.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Jianakoplos, N. A., & Bernasek, A. (1998). Are women more risk averse? Economic Inquiry, 36(4), 620–630.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Keldenich, K., & Klemm, M. (2012). Double or nothing!? Small groups making decisions under risk in ‘quiz taxi’. Journal of Economic Behavior and Organization, 84(1), 163–173.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Lichtenstien, S., & Fischhoff, B. (1977). Do those who know more also know more about how much they know? Organizational Behavior and Human Performance, 20(2), 159–183.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Post, T., van den Assem, M. J., Baltussen, G., & Thaler, R. H. (2008). Deal or no deal? Decision making under risk in a large-payoff game show. American Economic Review, 98(1), 38–71.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Ronay, R., & Kim, D. (2006). Gender differences in explicit and implicit risk attitudes: A socially facilitated phenomenon. British Journal of Social Psychology, 45(2), 397–419.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Vinokur, A. (1971). Review and theoretical analysis of the effects of group processes upon individual and group decisions involving risk. Psychology Bulletin, 76(4), 231–250.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of PsychologyLake Forest CollegeLake ForestUSA
  2. 2.Department of EconomicsLake Forest CollegeLake ForestUSA

Personalised recommendations