Ambiguity attitudes of individuals and groups revisited: An (online) laboratory experiment on natural events in the gain and loss domain.

We study ambiguity attitudes at the individual level as well as how they are aggregated into group decisions. We investigate decisions in both gain and loss domain. In total, we conduct four different treatments in a 2x2 between-group design: individual-gain, group-gain, individual-loss, group-loss. Each of the groups consist of three people. The participants have to decide at what probability they prefer a risky bet over an ambiguous bet. The event for the ambiguous bet is based on the temperature in one unknown city on a known date at a specific point in time. Individuals and groups have to make six decisions (for every event) for the city. The city will be randomly drawn at the end per person or group from a worldwide selection.

2022-02-08

2022-03-04

Baillon et al. ‘s ambiguity aversion index as well as their ambiguity-generated insensitivity index.

Baillon et al. (2018, p. 1840) describe the ambiguity aversion index as follows:
The ambiguity aversion index measures the well-known aversion to ambiguity and is often taken to be normative. The ambiguity-generated insensitivity index captures the degree of ambiguity, that is, the perceived level of ambiguity. The higher this level is, the less the decision maker discriminates between different degrees of likelihood, and the more these degrees are treated alike, as one blur. The second index thus also captures insensitivity toward likelihood changes

Baillon, A., Huang, Z., Selim, A., & Wakker, P. P. (2018). Measuring ambiguity attitudes for all (natural) events. Econometrica, 86(5), 1839-1858.

Chats of the groups and the individuals (individuals could "chat" only with themselves)

Cognitive reflection test (5 questions, with positive or negative incentives depending on gain or loss treatment).

Control variables from a short questionnaire at the end of the survey:
• Demographic variables (age, gender, income, children (yes,no), faculty, semester count, vaccination status, number of experiment participations)
• Ten-Item Personality Inventory
• Risk preferences (general, weather domain),
• Ambiguity preferences (survey method questions),
• Task comprehensibility.

Questions about group decision making (group solution finding, consideration of own preferences in group decision making).

Participants receive the general experimental instructions and the description of the tasks and proceed to answer two control questions. The actual decisions are based on the method of Baillon et al. (2018). To assess ambiguity attitudes, participants fill in six tables for temperature events of an unknown city. The groups can chat together, while the individuals can chat with themselves. The groups have three chances per table to reach a common solution (unanimity). Participants then answer five questions of a cognitive reflection task (get paid additional/ less 2 Euro per right/wrong answer). In the end, there is a questionnaire concerning demographic variables, personality and behavioral attitudes. On the last page, the payout is revealed. The payment of the participants consists of a starting amount of 10 Euro, a payment of one line of one of the six choice table of ambiguity tasks (either plus 10 Euro or minus 10 Euro; this is randomly determined) and the answering of cognitive reflection tasks to balance the payments.

Randomization at the beginning of each session by a computer

Individual.

No

360 participants

360 participants: 45 independent observations per treatment, i.e., 45 participants per individual treatment and 45 groups (135 participants) per group treatment.

45 Individual Gain
45 Individual Loss
135 (45 groups) Group Gain
135 (45 groups) Group Loss

Analysis+Plan.pdf