Experimental methods: Learning your own risk preferences under different risk elicitation methods

Caferra, Rocco and Morone, Andrea and Pierno, Donato (2025): Experimental methods: Learning your own risk preferences under different risk elicitation methods. Published in: Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics , Vol. 119, No. 102450 (9 October 2025)

Abstract

This paper examines whether changes in risk preferences reflect genuine behavioural shifts or result from the elicitation method used. In a within-subject experiment, participants made initial risky choices, completed 24 unpaid learning rounds with real dice and recorded outcomes, and then made final choices. We compare four risk elicitation methods: two Ordered Lottery Selection (OLS) and two Multiple Price List (MPL) tasks. Our analysis focuses on how preferences evolve with experience, the role of reported errors during the learning phase, and the effect of method complexity (i.e., the number of potential payoff outcomes in a given lottery) on revealed risk attitudes. Results show that MPL tasks, particularly when more complex, produce stronger changes in behaviour. Participants who made errors during the MPL learning phase were more likely to display increased risk aversion. This suggests that task comprehension and cognitive load influence the stability of preferences. The findings contribute to the broader debate on preference stability and highlight the methodological relevance of comparing elicitation tools within the same experimental framework.

• Item Type: MPRA Paper
• Language: English
• Keywords: Risk preferences; Complexity; Experimental methodology; Elicitation Methods; Experience.
• Subjects: D - Microeconomics > D8 - Information, Knowledge, and Uncertainty > D81 - Criteria for Decision-Making under Risk and Uncertainty; D - Microeconomics > D9 - Intertemporal Choice > D90 - General

References

Attanasi, G., Corazzini, L., Georgantz ́ıs, N., and Passarelli, F. (2014). Risk aversion, overconfidence and private information as determinants of majority thresholds. Pacific Economic Review, 19(3):355–386.

Attanasi, G., Georgantz ́ıs, N., Rotondi, V., and Vigani, D. (2018). Lottery-and survey-based risk attitudes linked through a multichoice elicitation task. Theory and Decision, 84:341–372.

Bernasconi, M., Corazzini, L., and Seri, R. (2014). Reference dependent preferences, hedonic adaptation and tax evasion: Does the tax burden matter? Journal of Economic Psychology, 40:103–118. Special Issue on Behavioral Dynamics of Tax Evasion.

Binswanger, H. P. (1980). Attitudes toward risk: Experimental measurement in rural india. American journal of agricultural economics, 62(3):395–407.

Binswanger, H. P. (1981). Attitudes toward risk: Theoretical implications of an experiment in rural india. The Economic Journal, 91(364):867–890.

Bradbury, M. A. S., Hens, T., and Zeisberger, S. (2015). Improving Investment Decisions with Simulated Experience*. Review of Finance, 19(3):1019–1052.

Charness, G. and Chemaya, N. (2023). Repeated experience and consistent risk preferences. Economics Letters, 233:111375.

Charness, G., Chemaya, N., and Trujano-Ochoa, D. (2023). Learning your own risk preferences. Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, 67(1):1–19.

Charness, G., Garcia, T., Offerman, T., and Villeval, M. C. (2020). Do measures of risk attitude in the laboratory predict behavior under risk in and outside of the laboratory? Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, 60:99–123.

Charness, G. and Gneezy, U. (2012). Strong evidence for gender differences in risk taking. Journal of Economic Behavior Organization, 83(1):50–58. Gender Differences in Risk Aversion and Competition.

Charness, G., Gneezy, U., and Imas, A. (2013). Experimental methods: Eliciting risk preferences. Journal of economic behavior and organization, 87:43–51.

Dave, C., Eckel, C. C., Johnson, C. A., and Rojas, C. (2010). Eliciting risk preferences: When is simple better? Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, 41:219–243.

Dohmen, T., Falk, A., Huffman, D., Sunde, U., Schupp, J., and Wagner, G. (2011). Individual risk attitudes: Measurement, determinants, and behavioral consequences. Journal of the European Economic Association, 9(3):522–550.

Eckel, C. C., El-Gamal, M. A., and Wilson, R. K. (2009). Risk loving after the storm: A bayesian network study of hurricane katrina evacuees. Journal of Economic Behavior and Organization, 69(2):110–124.

Eckel, C. C. and Grossman, P. J. (2008). Forecasting risk attitudes: An experimental study using actual and forecast gamble choices. Journal of Economic Behavior and Organization, 68(1):1–17.

Ert, E. and Haruvy, E. (2017). Revisiting risk aversion: Can risk preferences change with experience? Economics Letters, 151:91–95.

Falk, A., Becker, A., Dohmen, T., Enke, B., Huffman, D., and Sunde, U. (2018). Global Evidence on Economic Preferences*. The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 133(4):1645–1692.

Harris, C. R. and Jenkins, M. (2006). Gender differences in risk assessment: why do women take fewer risks than men? Judgment and Decision making, 1(1):48–63.

Harrison, G. W. and Rutstr ̈om, E. E. (2008). Risk Aversion in the Laboratory. In Risk Aversion in Experiments, Research in Experimental Economics, pages 41–196. Emerald Group Publishing Limited.

Hey, J. D. (2001). Does repetition improve consistency? Experimental economics, 4:5–54.

Hey, J. D. and Orme, C. (1994). Investigating generalizations of expected utility theory using experimental data. Econometrica: Journal of the Econometric Society, pages 1291–1326.

Holt, C. A. and Laury, S. K. (2002). Risk aversion and incentive effects. American economic review, 92(5):1644–1655.

Holzmeister, F. and Stefan, M. (2021). The risk elicitation puzzle revisited: Across-methods (in) consistency? Experimental economics, 24:593–616.

Kaufmann, C., Weber, M., and Haisley, E. (2013). The role of experience sampling and graphical displays on one’s investment risk appetite. Management science, 59(2):323–340.

McClennen, E. (1990). Rationality and Dynamic Choice: Foundational Explorations. Paperback re-issue. Cambridge University Press.

Miller, L., Meyer, D. E., and Lanzetta, J. T. (1969). Choice among equal expected value alternatives: Sequential effects of winning probability level on risk preferences. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 79(3p1):419.

Pedroni, A., Frey, R., Bruhin, A., Dutilh, G., Hertwig, R., and Rieskamp, J. (2017). The risk elicitation puzzle. Nature Human Behaviour, 1(11):803–809.