Predicting  Financial Risk Tolerance and Risk-Taking Behaviour: A Comparison of Questionnaires and Tests

Grable, John E.; Hubble, Amy; Kruger, Michelle; Visbal, Melissa

doi:10.2478/fprj-2020-0002

Abstract

The purpose of this study was to compare and contrast the concurrent, convergent, and predictive validity of a variety of risk tolerance tests and questionnaires. The tested measures represent tests and scales derived from economic and psychometric theory. It was determined that tests based on economic theory had similar predictive power, implying that economic measures provided some degree of convergent validity across measures. Only the psychometric risk tolerance measure, however, was found to be correlated to other indicators of risk tolerance and risk-taking. Results from this exploratory study suggest that a questionnaire developed using psychometric theory appears to offer superior predictive insight into financial risk-taking, at least when compared across the measurement techniques examined in this study.

References

Adamowicz, W, Louviere, J & Williams, M 1994, ‘Combining revealed and stated preferences methods for valuing environmental amenities’, Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, vol. 26, pp. 271–292.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Ahmad, A, Safwan, N, Ali, M & Tabasum, A 2011, ‘How demographic characteristics affect the perception of investors about financial risk tolerance’, Interdisciplinary Journal of Contemporary Research in Business, vol. 3, no. 2, pp. 412–417.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
ASIC 2011, Review of financial advice industry practice, Australian Securities & Investments Commission, Brisbane, QLD.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
ASIC 2017, Risk management systems of responsible entities, Australian Securities & Investments Commission, Brisbane, QLD.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Barsky, RB, Juster, FT, Kimball, MS & Shapiro, MD 1997, ‘Preference parameters and behavioral heterogeneity: an experimental approach in the health and retirement study’, The Quarterly Journal of Economics, vol. 112, pp. 537–579.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Beauchamp, JP, Cesarini, D & Johannesson, M 2017, ‘The psychometric and empirical properties of measures of risk preference, Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, vol. 54, pp. 203–237.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Brand, M, Fujiwara, E, Borsutzky, S, Kalbe, E, Kessler, J & Markowitsch, HJ, 2005a, ‘Decision-making deficits of Korsakoff patients in a new gambling task with explicit rules: associations with executive functions’, Neuropsychology, vol. 19, pp. 267–277.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Buss, AH 1989, ‘Personality as traits’, American Psychologist, vol. 44, pp. 1378–1388.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Certified Financial Planner Board of Standards Inc 2018, Code of Ethics and Standards of Conduct, CFP Board Washington, DC.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Charness, G, Gneezy, U & Imas, A 2013, ‘Experimental methods: eliciting risk preferences’, Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, vol. 87, pp. 43–51.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Corter, JE & Chen, YJ 2006, ‘Do investment risk tolerance attitudes predict portfolio risk?’, Journal of Business and Psychology, vol. 20, pp. 369–381.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Dave, C, Eckel, CC, Johnson, CA & Rojas, C 2010, ‘Eliciting risk preferences: when is simple better? Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, vol. 41, pp. 219–243.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Dohmen, T, Falk, A, Huffman, D, Sunde, U, Schupp, JU & Wagner, GG 2011, ‘Individual risk attitudes: measurement, determinants, and behavioral consequences’, Journal of the European Economic Association, vol. 9, pp. 522–550.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Dow, J & Werlang, SRDC 1992, ‘Uncertainty aversion, risk aversion, and the optimal choice of portfolio’, Econometrica, vol. 60, pp. 197–204.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Eckel, CC & Grossman, PJ 2008, ‘Forecasting risk attitudes: an experimental study using actual and forecast gamble choices’, Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, vol. 68, pp. 1–17.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Ellsberg, D 1961, ‘Risk, ambiguity and savage axioms’, Quarterly Journal of Economics, vol. 75, pp. 643–679.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Faff, R, Hallahan, T & McKenzie, M 2009, ‘Nonlinear linkages between financial risk tolerance and demographic characteristics’, Applied Economics Letters, vol. 16, pp. 1329–1332.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Fischhoff, B, Slovic, P, Lichtenstein, S, Read, S & Combs, B 1978, ‘How safe is enough? A psychometric study of attitudes towards technological risks and benefits’, Policy Sciences, vol. 9, pp. 127–152.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Frey, R, Pedroni, A, Mata, R, Rieskamp, J, & Hertwig, R 2017, ‘Risk preference shares the psychometric structure of major psychological traits’, Science Advances, vol. 3, DOI: 10.1126/sciadv.1701381.
Open DOI Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Grable, JE & Lytton, RH 1999, ‘Financial risk tolerance revisited: the development of a risk assessment instrument’, Financial Services Review, vol. 8, no. 3, pp. 163–181.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Hanna, SD & Lindamood, S 2004, ‘An improved measure of risk aversion’, Journal of Financial Counseling and Planning, vol. 15, no. 2, pp. 27–45.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Hanna, SD, Gutter, MS & Fan, JX 2001, ‘A measure of risk tolerance based on economic theory’, Journal of Financial Counseling and Planning, vol. 12, no. 2, pp. 53–60.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Houthakker, HS 1950, ‘Revealed preference and the utility function’, Economica, New Series, vol. 17, pp. 159–174.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Joseph, AK, Richter, D, Samanez-Larkin, GR, Wagner, GG, Hertwig, R & Mata, R 2016, ‘Stability and change in risk-taking propensity across the adult life span’, Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, vol. 111, pp. 430–450.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Knight, FH 1921, Risk, Uncertainty, and Profiit, Sentry Press, New York.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Kuzniak, S, Rabbani, A, Heo, W, Ruiz-Menjivar, J & Grable, JE 2015, ‘The Grable and Lytton risk tolerance scale: a 15-year retrospective’, Financial Services Review, vol. 24, pp. 177–192.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
LÖnnqvist, J-E, Verkasalo, M, Walkowitz, G & Wichardt, PC 2015, ‘Measuring individual risk attitudes in the lab: task or ask? An empirical comparison’, Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, vol. 119, pp. 254–266.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Moore, S 2018, ‘Communication task difficulty in investment risk profiling: a linguistic perspective’, Financial Planning Research Journal, vol. 4, no. 1, pp. 33–52.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Nunnally, J & Bernstein, L 1994, Psychometric Theory, McGraw-Hill, New York.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Pett, JA 2016, Nonparametric statistics for health care research: Statistics for small samples and unusual distributions (2^nd ed.), Sage, Los Angeles.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Rabbani, AG, Grable, JE, Heo W, Nobre, L & Kuzniak, S 2017, ‘Stock market volatility and changes in financial risk tolerance during the Great Recession’, Journal of Financial Counseling and Planning, vol. 28, no. 1, pp. 140–154.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Remler, DK, & Van Ryzin, GG 2015, Research Methods in Practice (2^nd ed.), Sage, Los Angeles.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Reynaud, A & Couture, S 2012, ‘Stability of risk preference measures: results from a field experiment on French farmers’, Theory and Decision, vol. 73, pp. 203–221.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Richter, MK 1966, ‘Revealed preference theory’, Econometrica, vol. 34, pp. 635–645.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Samuelson, PA 1948, ‘Consumption theory in terms of revealed preference’, Economica, New Series, vol. 15, pp. 243–253.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Schiebener, J & Brand, M 2015, ‘Decision making under objective risk conditions–a review of cognitive and emotional correlates, strategies, feedback processing, and external influences’, Neuropsychology Review, vol. 25, no. 2, pp. 171–198.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Weber, EU, Blais, A-R & Betz, NE 2002, ‘A domain-specific risk-attitude scale: measuring risk perceptions and risk behaviors’, Journal of Behavioral Decision Making, vol. 15, pp. 263–290.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
Weber, EU & Johnson, EJ 2009, ‘Decisions under uncertainty: psychological, economic, and neuroeconomic explanations of risk preference’, in Glimcher, PW, Camerer, CF, Fehr, E & Poldrack, RA (eds.) Neuroeconomics: Decision Making and the Brain, Elsevier, Oxford, UK, pp. 127–144.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article

Predicting Financial Risk Tolerance and Risk-Taking Behaviour: A Comparison of Questionnaires and Tests

Abstract

Paradigm

My account