Cited by 924Decision-Making and Behavioral EconomicsExperimental Behavioral Economics StudiesFinancial Literacy, Pension, Retirement Analysis

Chapter 113 Men, Women and Risk Aversion: Experimental Evidence

Eckel, Catherine C., Grossman, Philip J.·2008·Handbook of Experimental Economics Results

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/s1574-0722(07)00113-8

Cites

41 of 41 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Women are typically found to be more risk-averse than men.

    “Another relevant difference is that women are typically found to be more risk-averse than men (for reviews of the literature, see Byrnes et al., 1999; Croson & Gneezy, 2009; Eckel & Grossman, 2008).”

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Eckel, C. C., & Grossman, P. J.
Affiliations
  • The University of Texas at Dallas (US)
  • St. Cloud State University (US)
Venue
Handbook of Experimental Economics Results
Publisher
Elsevier
Published
2008
Pages
1061-1073
ISSN
1574-0722 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W20182383
Cited by
924
References
41
Citations by year
2026: 35 · 2025: 64 · 2024: 78 · 2023: 80 · 2022: 90 · 2021: 72 · 2020: 68 · 2019: 67 · 2018: 71 · 2017: 55 · 2016: 59 · 2015: 39 · 2014: 29 · 2013: 39 · 2012: 23
FWCI
22.47
Type
book chapter
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
Handbook of experimental economics results (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › General Decision Sciences › Decision-Making and Behavioral Economics
  • Social Sciences › Safety Research › Experimental Behavioral Economics Studies
  • Social Sciences › Business, Management and Accounting › Accounting › Financial Literacy, Pension, Retirement Analysis
Keywords
risk aversion, gender differences, expected utility maximization, decision making under risk, framing effects, investment decision-making

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review