@article{ref1,
title="Violence and risk preference: experimental evidence from Afghanistan: comment",
journal="American economic review",
year="2018",
author="Vieider, Ferdinand M.",
volume="108",
number="8",
pages="2366-2382",
abstract="In this comment on Callen et al. (2014), I revisit recent evidence uncovering a &quot;preference for certainty&quot; in violation of dominant normative and descriptive theories of decision-making under risk. I show that the empirical findings are potentially confounded by systematic noise. I then develop choice lists that allow me to disentangle these different explanations. Experimental results obtained with these lists reject explanations based on a preference for certainty in favor of explanations based on random choice. From a theoretical point of view, the levels of risk aversion detected in the choice list involving certainty can be accounted for by prospect theory through reference dependence activated by salient outcomes.<p /> <p>Language: en</p>",
language="en",
issn="0002-8282",
doi="10.1257/aer.20160789",
url="http://dx.doi.org/10.1257/aer.20160789"
}