MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2160791614

The Effect of an Additional Alternative on Measured Risk Preferences in a Laboratory Experiment in Peru

2006· preprint· en· W2160791614 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Jim Engle‐Warnick, Javier Escobal, Sonia Laszlo

Bibliographic record

VenueeScholarship@McGill (McGill) · 2006
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldDecision Sciences
TopicDecision-Making and Behavioral Economics
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
FundersMcGill UniversityJohns Hopkins UniversityBrown University
KeywordsQuarter (Canadian coin)Test (biology)ChosePsychologyEconometricsEconomicsDemographyGeographySociologyPolitical scienceBiology
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We experimentally test for the effect of an additional alternative on the measured risk preferences of farmers in rural Peru.In our experiment, subjects revealed their risk preferences with a series of choices between two gambles.We added a third gamble, which was always dominated by one of the two existing gambles.We found that subjects chose this gamble nearly one quarter of the time, in some cases causing the subjects to appear to be more risk loving.We found that subjects in a traditional laboratory environment did not choose the dominated gamble, but their choices were affected by its presence.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.012
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.008
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Research integrity
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.977
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0120.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0030.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.063
GPT teacher head0.343
Teacher spread0.280 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designOther design
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations3
Published2006
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueeScholarship@McGill (McGill)Same topicDecision-Making and Behavioral EconomicsFrench-language works237,207