Cognitive abilities and risk-taking: Errors, not preferences

Amador, Luis and Brañas-Garza, Pablo and Espín, Antonio M. and Garcia, Teresa and Hernández, Ana (2019): Cognitive abilities and risk-taking: Errors, not preferences. Forthcoming in: European Economic Review

Abstract

There is an intense debate whether risk-taking behavior is partially driven by cognitive abilities. The critical issue is whether choices arising from subjects with lower cognitive abilities are more likely driven by errors or lack of understanding than pure preferences for risk. The latter implies that the often-argued link between risk preferences and cognitive abilities (a common finding is that abilities relate negatively to risk aversion and positively to loss aversion) might be a spurious correlation. This experiment reports evidence from a sample of 556 participants who made choices in two risk-related tasks and completed three cognitive tasks, all with real monetary incentives: number-additions (including incentive-compatible expected number of correct additions), the Cognitive Reflection Test (to measure analytical/reflective thinking) and the Remote Associates Test (for convergent thinking). Results are unambiguous: none of our cognition measures plays any systematic role on risky decision making. Using structural equation modeling and factor analysis, we show that cognitive abilities are negatively associated with noisy, inconsistent choices and this effect may make higher ability individuals appear to be less risk averse and more loss averse. Yet we show that errors are more likely to appear when the two payoffs in a given decision exhibit similar probability. Therefore, our results suggest that failing to account for noisy decision making might have led to erroneously inferring a correlation between cognitive abilities and risk preferences in previous studies.

• Item Type: MPRA Paper
• Language: English
• Keywords: decision making under uncertainty, cognitive abilities, online experiment, risk and loss aversion, factor analysis
• Subjects: C - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods > C9 - Design of Experiments > C91 - Laboratory, Individual Behavior; D - Microeconomics > D8 - Information, Knowledge, and Uncertainty > D81 - Criteria for Decision-Making under Risk and Uncertainty

References

Åkerlund, D., Golsteyn, B.H., Grönqvist, H. and Lindahl, L. (2016). Time discounting and criminal behavior. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 113(22): 6160–6165.

Anderhub, V., Müller, R. and Schmidt, C. (2001). Design and evaluation of an economic experiment via the Internet. Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization 46(2): 227–247.

Andersson, O., Holm, H. J., Tyran, J. R. and Wengström, E. (2016). Risk Aversion relates to cognitive ability: Preferences or noise? Journal of the European Economic Association, 14(5): 1129–1154.

Andersson, O., Holm, H. J., Tyran, J. R., & Wengström, E. (2020). Robust inference in risk elicitation tasks. Journal of Risk and Uncertainty: 1-15.

Angrisani M. and Casanova, M. (2011). Understanding heterogeneity in household portfolios: The role of cognitive ability and preference parameters. Mimeo USC.

Angrisani M. and Casanova, M. (2018). Portfolio allocations of older Americans: The role of cognitive ability and preference parameters. Mimeo USC.

Arechar, A. A., Gächter, S. and Molleman, L. (2018). Conducting interactive experiments online. Experimental Economics, 21(1): 99–131.

Beauchamp, J. P., Benjamin, D. J. and Chabris, C. F. (2012). How malleable are risk preferences and loss aversion? Mimeo USC.

Beauchamp, J. P., Cesarini, D. and Johannesson, M. (2017). The psychometric and empirical properties of measures of risk preferences. Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, 54(3): 203–237.

Benjamin, D. J., Brown, S. A. and Shapiro, J. M. (2013). Who is behavioral? Cognitive ability and anomalous preferences. Journal of the European Economic Association, 11(6): 1231–1255.

Bickel, W. K., Odum, A. L. and Madden, G. J. (1999). Impulsivity and cigarette smoking: delay discounting in current, never, and ex-smokers. Psychopharmacology, 146(4): 447–454.

Booth, A. I. and Katic, P. (2013). Cognitive skills, gender and risk preferences. Economic Record, 89(284): 19–30.

Booth, A., Cardona-Sosa, L. and Nolen, P. (2014). Gender differences in risk aversion: Do single-sex environments affect their development? Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, 99, 126–54. Bosch-Domènech, A., Brañas-Garza, P. and Espín, A. M. (2014). Can exposure to prenatal sex hormones (2D: 4D) predict cognitive reflection? Psychoneuroendocrinology, 43: 1–10.

Brañas-Garza, P., Guillen, P., Lopez, R. (2008). Math skills and risk attitudes. Economics Letters, 99(2): 332–36.

Brañas-Garza, P., and Rustichini A. (2011). Organizing effects of testosterone and economic behavior: Not just risk taking. PLoS ONE, 6(12): e29842.

Brañas-Garza, P., Kujal, P. and Lenkei, B. (2019). Cognitive Reflection Test: Whom, how, when. Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics, 89: 101455.

Bruner, D. M. (2017). Does decision error decrease with risk aversion? Experimental Economics, 20(1): 259-273.

Burks, S. V., Carpenter, J. P., Goette, L. and Rustichini, A. (2009). Cognitive skills affect economic preferences, strategic behavior, and job attachment. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 106(19): 7745–50.

Campitelli, G. and Labollita, M. (2010). Correlations of cognitive reflection with judgments and choices. Judgment and Decision Making, 5(3): 182–91.

Capraro, V., Corgnet, B., Espín, A. M. and Hernán-González, R. (2017). Deliberation favours social efficiency by making people disregard their relative shares: evidence from USA and India. Royal Society Open Science, 4(2): 160605.

Chapman, J., Snowberg, E., Wang, S. and Camerer. C. (2018). Loss attitudes in the U.S. population, Evidence from dynamically optimized sequential experimentation (DOSE). NBER Working Paper 25072.

Charness, G., Gneezy, U. and Imas, A. (2013). Experimental methods: Eliciting risk preferences. Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, 87: 43–51.

Charness, G., Gneezy, U., and Halladay, B. (2016). Experimental methods: Pay one or pay all. Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, 131(Part A): 141–150.

Charness, G., Eckel, C., Gneezy, U., & Kajackaite, A. (2018). Complexity in risk elicitation may affect the conclusions: A demonstration using gender differences. Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, 56(1): 1–17.

Christelis, D., Jappelli, T. and Padula, M. (2010). Cognitive abilities and portfolio choice. European Economic Review, 54(1):18–38.

Cokely, E. T. and Kelley, C. M. (2009). Cognitive abilities and superior decision making under risk: A protocol analysis and process model evaluation. Judgment and Decision Making, 4(1): 20–33.

Cole, S., Paulson, A. and Shastry, G. K. (2014). Smart money? The effect of education on financial outcomes. The Review of Financial Studies, 27(7): 2022–2051.

Corgnet, B., Espín, A. M. and Hernán-González, R. (2016). Creativity and cognitive skills among millennials: thinking too much and creating too little. Frontiers in Psychology, 7: 1626.

Cueva, C., Iturbe-Ormaetxe, I., Mata-Pérez, E., Ponti, G., Sartarelli, M., Yu,H. and Zhukova, V. (2015). Cognitive (ir)reflection: New experimental evidence. Journal of Behavioral & Experimental Economics, 64: 81–93.

Cunha, F., Heckman, J. J., and Schennach, S. M. (2010). Estimating the technology of cognitive and noncognitive skill formation. Econometrica, 78(3): 883-931.

Dohmen, T., Falk, A., Huffman, D. and Sunde, U. (2010). Are risk aversion and impatience related to cognitive ability? The American Economic Review, 100(3): 1238–1260.

Dohmen, T., Falk, A., Huffman, D. and Sunde, U. (2018). On the relationship between cognitive ability and risk preference. Journal of Economic Perspectives, 32(2): 115–134.

Eckel, C. C. and Grossman, P. J. (2002). Sex differences and statistical stereotyping in attitudes toward financial risk. Evolution and Human Behavior, 23(4): 281–295.

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.

Frederick, S. (2005). Cognitive reflection and decision making. Journal of Economic Perspectives, 19(4): 25–42.

Frisell, T., Pawitan, Y. and Långström, N. (2012). Is the association between general cognitive ability and violent crime caused by family-level confounders? PLoS ONE, 7(7): e41783.

Gächter, S., Johnson, E. J. and Herrmann, A. (2007). Individual-level loss aversion in riskless and risky choices. IZA Discussion Paper 2961.

Grinblatt, M., Keloharju, M. and Linnainmaa, J. (2011). IQ and stock market participation. The Journal of Finance, 66(6): 2121–64.

Gillen, B., Snowberg, E., and Yariv, L. (2019). Experimenting with measurement error: Techniques with applications to the Caltech cohort study. Journal of Political Economy, 127(4): 1826-1863.

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

Horton, J. J., Rand, D. G. and Zeckhauser, R. J. (2011). The online laboratory: Conducting experiments in a real labor market. Experimental Economics, 14(3): 399–425.

Jagelka, T. (2020). Are Economists' Preferences Psychologists' Personality Traits? A Structural Approach. IZA Discussion Paper 13303.

Jensen, A. R. (1998). The g factor: The science of mental ability (Vol. 648). Westport, CT: Praeger.

Lilleholt, L. (2019). Cognitive ability and risk aversion: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Judgment and Decision Making, 14(3): 234–279.

Mather, M., Mazar, N., Gorlick, M. A., Lighthall, N. R., Burgeno, J., Schoeke, A. and Ariely, D. (2012). Risk preferences and aging: the “certainty effect” in older adults´ decision making. Psychology and Aging, 27(4): 801–16.

Mednick, S. A. (1962). The associative basis of the creative process. Psychological Review, 69(3): 220–32.

Meier, S. and Sprenger, C. D. (2012). Time discounting predicts creditworthiness. Psychological Science, 23(1): 56–58.

Mrkva, K., Johnson, E. J., Gächter, S., & Herrmann, A. (2019). Moderating loss aversion: loss aversion has moderators, but reports of its death are greatly exaggerated. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 30(3): 407-28.

Moore, D. A., and Healy, P. J. (2008). The trouble with overconfidence. Psychological Review, 115(2): 502-517.

Niederle, M. and Vesterlund, L. (2007). Do women shy away from competition? Do men compete too much? The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 122(3): 1067–1101.

Oechssler, J., Roider, A. and Schmitz, P. W. (2009). Cognitive abilities and behavioral biases. Journal of Economic Behavior and Organization, 72(1): 147–52.

Pachur, T., Mata, R. and Hertwig, R. (2017). Who dares, who errs? disentangling cognitive and motivational roots of age differences in decisions under risk. Psychological Science, 28(4), 504–518.

Park, N. Y. (2016). Domain-specific risk preference and cognitive ability. Economics Letters, 141: 1–4.

Rucker, D. D., Preacher, K. J., Tormala, Z. L., & Petty, R. E. (2011). Mediation analysis in social psychology: Current practices and new recommendations. Social and Personality Psychology Compass, 5(6): 359-371.

Rustichini, A., DeYoung, C. G., Anderson, J. and Burks, S. V. (2016). Toward the integration of personality theory and decision theory in explaining economic behavior: An experimental investigation. Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics, 64: 122-37.

Shen, W., Hommel, B., Yuan, Y., Chang, L. and Zhang, W. (2018). Risk-taking and creativity: Convergent, but not divergent thinking is better in low-risk takers. Creativity Research Journal, 30(2): 224–231.

Sousa, S. (2010). Are smarter people really less risk averse? CeDEx Discussion Paper Series 2010-17.

Sutter, M., Kocher, M. G., Glätzle-Rützler, D. and Trautmann, S. T. (2013). Impatience and uncertainty: experimental decisions predict adolescents' field behavior. The American Economic Review, 103(1): 510–531.

Taylor, M. P. (2013). Bias and brains: Risk aversion and cognitive ability across real and hypothetical settings. Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, 46(3): 299–320.

Taylor, M. P. (2016). Are high-ability individuals really more tolerant of risk? a test of the relationship between risk aversion and cognitive ability. Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics, 63: 136–147.

Toplak, M. E., West, R. F. and Stanovich, K. E. (2014). Assessing miserly information processing: An expansion of the Cognitive Reflection Test. Thinking and Reasoning, 20(2): 147–168.

Tymula, A., Rosenberg-Belmaker, L. A., Roy, A. K., Ruderman, L., Manson, K., Glimcher, P. W. and Levy, I. (2012). Adolescents' risk-taking behavior is driven by tolerance to ambiguity. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 109(42): 17135–17140.

Van Rooij, M., Lusardi, A. and Alessie, R. (2011). Financial literacy and stock market participation. Journal of Financial Economics, 101(2): 449–472.