The impact of the level of responsibility on choices under risk: the role of blame

Gilbert G. Eijkelenboom, Ingrid Rohde, Alexander Vostroknutov*

*Corresponding author for this work

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleAcademicpeer-review

Abstract

We use a within-subjects design to study how responsibility for the payoffs of different number of others influences the choices under risk, and how choosing together with another person changes these decisions. After controlling for the regression to the mean, we find a weak effect of responsibility for one other person on risk taking as compared to choosing just for oneself. We, however, do find that the number of others influenced by the choice matters: when it increases from one to three, risk averse subjects choose riskier options and risk loving subjects choose more cautiously, which pushes the choices towards the modal risk preferences in the population. Mutual responsibility makes choices for others shift even more in the same direction. The observed behavior is in accordance with the blame avoidance hypothesis: decision makers with responsibility try to reduce the amount of blame for their choices, which is minimal when the choices for others are consistent with what they would have chosen for themselves.
Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)794-814
Number of pages21
JournalExperimental Economics
Volume22
Issue number4
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - Dec 2019

Keywords

  • Responsibility
  • Blame
  • Risk preferences
  • Choice in groups
  • DECISION-MAKING
  • PREFERENCE
  • BEHAVIOR
  • AVERSION
  • OTHERS
  • SHIFTS

Cite this

@article{f049e66dcb274d0e95c86ab1706b8a28,
title = "The impact of the level of responsibility on choices under risk: the role of blame",
abstract = "We use a within-subjects design to study how responsibility for the payoffs of different number of others influences the choices under risk, and how choosing together with another person changes these decisions. After controlling for the regression to the mean, we find a weak effect of responsibility for one other person on risk taking as compared to choosing just for oneself. We, however, do find that the number of others influenced by the choice matters: when it increases from one to three, risk averse subjects choose riskier options and risk loving subjects choose more cautiously, which pushes the choices towards the modal risk preferences in the population. Mutual responsibility makes choices for others shift even more in the same direction. The observed behavior is in accordance with the blame avoidance hypothesis: decision makers with responsibility try to reduce the amount of blame for their choices, which is minimal when the choices for others are consistent with what they would have chosen for themselves.",
keywords = "Responsibility, Blame, Risk preferences, Choice in groups, DECISION-MAKING, PREFERENCE, BEHAVIOR, AVERSION, OTHERS, SHIFTS",
author = "Eijkelenboom, {Gilbert G.} and Ingrid Rohde and Alexander Vostroknutov",
note = "data: own data set from lab",
year = "2019",
month = "12",
doi = "10.1007/s10683-018-9587-y",
language = "English",
volume = "22",
pages = "794--814",
journal = "Experimental Economics",
issn = "1386-4157",
publisher = "Springer, Cham",
number = "4",

}

The impact of the level of responsibility on choices under risk : the role of blame. / Eijkelenboom, Gilbert G.; Rohde, Ingrid; Vostroknutov, Alexander.

In: Experimental Economics, Vol. 22, No. 4, 12.2019, p. 794-814.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleAcademicpeer-review

TY - JOUR

T1 - The impact of the level of responsibility on choices under risk

T2 - the role of blame

AU - Eijkelenboom, Gilbert G.

AU - Rohde, Ingrid

AU - Vostroknutov, Alexander

N1 - data: own data set from lab

PY - 2019/12

Y1 - 2019/12

N2 - We use a within-subjects design to study how responsibility for the payoffs of different number of others influences the choices under risk, and how choosing together with another person changes these decisions. After controlling for the regression to the mean, we find a weak effect of responsibility for one other person on risk taking as compared to choosing just for oneself. We, however, do find that the number of others influenced by the choice matters: when it increases from one to three, risk averse subjects choose riskier options and risk loving subjects choose more cautiously, which pushes the choices towards the modal risk preferences in the population. Mutual responsibility makes choices for others shift even more in the same direction. The observed behavior is in accordance with the blame avoidance hypothesis: decision makers with responsibility try to reduce the amount of blame for their choices, which is minimal when the choices for others are consistent with what they would have chosen for themselves.

AB - We use a within-subjects design to study how responsibility for the payoffs of different number of others influences the choices under risk, and how choosing together with another person changes these decisions. After controlling for the regression to the mean, we find a weak effect of responsibility for one other person on risk taking as compared to choosing just for oneself. We, however, do find that the number of others influenced by the choice matters: when it increases from one to three, risk averse subjects choose riskier options and risk loving subjects choose more cautiously, which pushes the choices towards the modal risk preferences in the population. Mutual responsibility makes choices for others shift even more in the same direction. The observed behavior is in accordance with the blame avoidance hypothesis: decision makers with responsibility try to reduce the amount of blame for their choices, which is minimal when the choices for others are consistent with what they would have chosen for themselves.

KW - Responsibility

KW - Blame

KW - Risk preferences

KW - Choice in groups

KW - DECISION-MAKING

KW - PREFERENCE

KW - BEHAVIOR

KW - AVERSION

KW - OTHERS

KW - SHIFTS

U2 - 10.1007/s10683-018-9587-y

DO - 10.1007/s10683-018-9587-y

M3 - Article

VL - 22

SP - 794

EP - 814

JO - Experimental Economics

JF - Experimental Economics

SN - 1386-4157

IS - 4

ER -