[VCEE Seminar] VCEE seminar 29.05.2020 online
Mailing list of the VCEE seminar series
vcee-seminar at lists.univie.ac.at
Mon May 25 13:42:43 CEST 2020
You are invited to attend the VCEE seminar on Friday, May 29, from 10:00 to
We have two speakers: Adrian Bruhin (University of Lausanne) and Kerstin
Grosch (IHS and University of Würzburg).
As the last time, we'll conduct this seminar via Zoom.
Here is the link to the meeting:
You'll need to install Zoom in order to join the seminar.
If you don't have Zoom already, you can simply click right now on the link
above; you'll then be prompted to install it.
If you already have Zoom you can also use the following information:
Meeting ID: 859 1563 1029
If you need help, feel free to contact Philipp (
philipp.kuelpmann at univie.ac.at).
The schedule is:
- 9:30: the waiting room opens
- 9:55: we let everyone into the seminar room
- 10:00--11:10: Adrian Bruhin's talk
- 11:10--11:20: break
- 11:20--12:30: Kerstin Grosch's talk
Here is more information on the talks:
“Risk and Rationality: The Relative Importance of Probability Weighting and
Choice Set Dependence”
The literature suggests that probability weighting and choice set
dependence influence risky choices. However, their relative importance has
not been tested jointly. We present a joint test that uses binary choices
between lotteries provoking Common Consequence and Common Ratio Allais
Paradoxes and manipulates their correlation structure. We show
non-parametrically that probability weighting and choice set dependence
both play a role at describing aggregate choices. To parsimoniously account
for heterogeneity, we also estimate a structural model using a finite
mixture approach. The model uncovers substantial heterogeneity and classes
subjects into three types: 38% Prospect Theory types whose choices are
predominantly driven by probability weighting, 34% Salience Theory types
whose choices are predominantly driven by choice set dependence, and 28%
Expected Utility Theory types. The model predicts type-specific differences
in the frequency of preference reversals out-of-sample, i.e., in choices
with a different context than the ones used for estimating the model.
Moreover, the out-of-sample predictions indicate that the choice context
shapes the influence of choice set dependence.
"Gender differences in leadership and dishonest behavior"
Leaders often behave unethically to increase own and stakeholders' profits.
We study gender differences in this balancing act. In a within-subjects
experiment, we measure dishonest behavior when reporting own payoffs and
when acting as leaders of groups. Before subjects decide for groups, they
can apply for leadership. Men behave more dishonestly than women when
deciding for themselves. The gender difference vanishes in groups, as women
who applied for leadership increase dishonest behavior. Preferences for
dishonesty explain why men apply for leadership, whereas they are not
explanatory for women. In a control treatment, female leaders do not
increase dishonesty for groups, when they were not able apply for
leadership (exogenous assignment). A follow-up study shows that women who
applied for leadership adjust their dishonest behavior to their belief on
honesty preferences of group members.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the VCEE-seminar