The DOI matches its Crossref record; 16 of the 17 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
An Experimental Test of Loss Aversion
Overview
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
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?
In the citing paper
“Consistent with this analysis, although women are generally found to be more risk-averse than men -perhaps because evolutionary pressures require the higher investing sex to be more cautious, since the costs of a poor mating decision are typically greater for women than for men (Buss, 1997) -the evidence for gender differences in loss aversion is inconsistent (Andersson et al., 2016; Chapman et al”
From Talking the talk, not walking the walk: The coevolution of overconfidence and loss aversion (2026) · cites this paper as Schmidt & Traub, 2002
Citations
Cites
Prospect Theory: An Analysis of Decision under Risk
Kahneman, D., & Tversky, A. (1979) · Econometrica · doi:10.2307/1914185 · Cited by 48,524
Prospect theory: An analysis of decision under risk
Kahneman, D. J., & Tversky, A. (1988) · Cambridge University Press eBooks · doi:10.1017/cbo9780511609220.014 · Cited by 32,662
Advances in prospect theory: Cumulative representation of uncertainty
Tversky, A., & Kahneman, D. (1992) · Journal of Risk and Uncertainty · doi:10.1007/bf00122574 · Cited by 15,467
Status quo bias in decision making
Samuelson, W., & Zeckhauser, R. (1988) · Journal of Risk and Uncertainty · doi:10.1007/bf00055564 · Cited by 5,897
Toward a positive theory of consumer choice
Thaler, R. H. (1980) · Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization · doi:10.1016/0167-2681(80)90051-7 · Cited by 5,796
Myopic Loss Aversion and the Equity Premium Puzzle
Benartzi, S., & Thaler, R. H. (1995) · The Quarterly Journal of Economics · doi:10.2307/2118511 · Cited by 2,487
Rabin, M. (1997) · RePEc: Research Papers in Economics · Cited by 2,463
Myopic Loss Aversion and the Equity Premium Puzzle
Benartzi, S., & Thaler, R. H. (1993) · National Bureau of Economic Research · doi:10.3386/w4369 · Cited by 1,803
Risk Aversion and Expected-utility Theory: A Calibration Theorem
Rabin, M. (2000) · Econometrica · doi:10.1111/1468-0262.00158 · Cited by 1,624
The Effects of Financial Incentives in Experiments: A Review and Capital-Labor-Production Framework
Camerer, C. F., Hogarth, R. M., Budescu, D. V., & Eckel, C. C. (1999) · Springer eBooks · doi:10.1007/978-94-017-1406-8_2 · Cited by 1,545
The Effects of Financial Incentives in Experiments: A Review and Capital-Labor-Production Framework
Camerer, C. F., & Hogarth, R. M. (1999) · Journal of Risk and Uncertainty · doi:10.1023/a:1007850605129 · Cited by 1,505
Risk aversion and expected-utility theory: A calibration theorem
Rabin, M. (2013) · World Scientific handbook in financial economic series · doi:10.1142/9789814417358_0013 · Cited by 691
An axiomatization of cumulative prospect theory
Wakker, P. P., & Tversky, A. (1993) · Journal of Risk and Uncertainty · doi:10.1007/bf01065812 · Cited by 451
Loss Aversion and Adaptation in the Labor Market: Empirical Indifference Functions and Labor Supply
Dunn, L. F. (1996) · The Review of Economics and Statistics · doi:10.2307/2109791 · Cited by 54
How to predict gender-differences in choice under risk: a case for the use of formalized models
Powell, M., Schubert, R., & Gysler, M. (2001) · Econstor (Econstor) · doi:10.3929/ethz-a-004296575 · Cited by 14
Schmidt, U., & Zank, H. (2002) · RePEc: Research Papers in Economics · Cited by 9
Self-citation
Cited by
Loss Aversion Under Prospect Theory: A Parameter-Free Measurement
Abdellaoui, M., Bleichrodt, H., & Paraschiv, C. (2007) · Management Science · doi:10.1287/mnsc.1070.0711 · Cited by 794
Köbberling, V., & Wakker, P. P. (2004) · Journal of Economic Theory · doi:10.1016/j.jet.2004.03.009 · Cited by 496
Thinking like a trader selectively reduces individuals' loss aversion
Sokol-Hessner, P., Hsu, M., Curley, N. G., Delgado, M. R., Camerer, C. F., & Phelps, E. A. (2009) · Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences · doi:10.1073/pnas.0806761106 · Cited by 452
Risk Preferences Around the World
Rieger, M. O., Wang, M., & Hens, T. (2014) · Management Science · doi:10.1287/mnsc.2013.1869 · Cited by 372
The “bomb” risk elicitation task
Crosetto, P., & Filippin, A. (2013) · Journal of Risk and Uncertainty · doi:10.1007/s11166-013-9170-z · Cited by 362
Metadata
- Authors
- Schmidt, U., & Traub, S.
- Affiliations
- Christian-Albrechts-Universität zu Kiel (DE)
- Corresponding author
- Traub, Stefan
- Venue
- Journal of Risk and Uncertainty
- Published
- 2002-11
- Volume
- 25
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- 233-249
- ISSN
- 0895-5646 (ISSN-L)
- 1573-0476
- OpenAlex
- W1575438854
- Cited by
- 233
- References
- 17
- Citations by year
- 2026: 4 · 2025: 9 · 2024: 8 · 2023: 8 · 2022: 17 · 2021: 12 · 2020: 7 · 2019: 15 · 2018: 4 · 2017: 14 · 2016: 13 · 2015: 15 · 2014: 15 · 2013: 16 · 2012: 17
- FWCI
- 3.74
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Licence
- Locations
- Journal of Risk and Uncertainty (publishedVersion)
- Funders
- European Commission
- Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › General Decision Sciences › Decision-Making and Behavioral Economics
- Social Sciences › Economics, Econometrics and Finance › Economics and Econometrics › Experimental Behavioral Economics Studies
- Social Sciences › Economics, Econometrics and Finance › Finance › Financial Literacy, Pension, Retirement Analysis
- Keywords
- loss aversion, cumulative prospect theory, risk preferences, gender differences
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
