Journal
FEMINIST ECONOMICS
Volume 22, Issue 2, Pages 114-142Publisher
ROUTLEDGE JOURNALS, TAYLOR & FRANCIS LTD
DOI: 10.1080/13545701.2015.1057609
Keywords
Risk aversion; gender; risk; stereotyping; effect size; D03; D81; J16
Categories
Ask authors/readers for more resources
Based on a growing body of experimental and other studies, two recent economics survey articles claim to find strong evidence that women are fundamental[ly] more risk-averse than men. Yet, much of the literature fails to clearly distinguish between differences that hold at the individual level (categorical differences between men and women) and patterns that appear only at the aggregate level (statistically detectable differences in men's and women's distributions, such as different means). There is a resulting problem of possible misinterpretation, as well as a dearth of appropriate attention to substantive significance. Additionally, one of the two surveys suffers from problems of statistical validity, possibly due to confirmation bias. Applying appropriate, expanded statistical techniques to the same data, this study finds substantial similarity and overlap between the distributions of men and women in risk taking, and a difference in means that is not substantively large.
Authors
I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.
Reviews
Recommended
No Data Available