DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

전망이론에 관한 실험연구

An Experimental Study on the Prospect Theory

  • 곽세영 (청주대학교 경상대학 경영학과)
  • Guahk, Seyoung (Dept. of Business Administration College of Economics and Business Administration Cheongju University)
  • 투고 : 2017.08.24
  • 심사 : 2017.11.20
  • 발행 : 2017.11.28

초록

이 논문은 전통적인 기대효용이론의 한계를 극복하기 위해 대안으로 제시된 Tversky와 Kahneman의 전망이론이 타당한지에 대해 실험연구를 통하여 검증하였다. 연구방법은 대학생 115명에게 가상적인 2개의 대안 중에서 하나를 선택하도록 하는 게임을 제시하였는데, 하나는 위험이 없는 안전한 투자안이며 다른 하나는 위험이 있는 투자안이다. 위험한 대안은 발생확률이 낮은 경우, 중간인 경우, 그리고 높은 경우로 구분하였으며, 게임의 금액도 이득이 발생하는 경우와 손실이 발생하는 경우로 나누었으며, 금액이 큰 경우와 작은 경우로 구분하여 실험을 하였다. 참가자들로부터 받은 응답을 최우추정법으로 분석한 결과, 이득의 상황에서 위험대안의 발생 가능성이 큰 경우에는 위험회피적, 위험대안의 발생 확률이 작은 때에는 위험선호적, 위험대안의 발생가능성이 작은 경우에는 위험회피적인 것으로, 그리고 위험대안의 발생확률이 중간인 경우에는 손실의 경우에만 통계적 유의성이 있었으며, 이득의 경우에는 유의적이지 않은 것으로 나타났다. 게임의 금액의 크기는 이득의 상황이건 손실의 경우이건 영향을 미치지 않았다. 따라서 본 연구의 결과는 Laury & Holt (2008)의 연구보다 대체로 더 강하게 전망이론을 지지하는 것으로 해석된다.

This paper performed an experimental study to test the validity of the prospect theory proposed by Tversky and Kahneman as an alternative to the expected utility theory. 115 college students attended the hypothetical games to choose one of two lotteries, one is safe option while the other one is risky. The risky options were set up to have low, medium or high probability of payoffs or losses. The amount of payoffs and losses of the lotteries was either large or small. Maximum likelihood estimation of the hypothetical games have shown that in case of high probability of positive payoffs the respondents were risk averse and when the probability of positive payoffs were small the respondents were risk loving. when the possibility of loss is high they were risk loving, while the probability is of loss is low the respondents were found to be risk averse. When the probability of risky options were medium the results were significant statistically in case of only losses. The amount of positive payoff or losses does not affect the results. Overall the results of this experiments support the prospect theory more than those of Laury & Holts (2008).

키워드

참고문헌

  1. Daniel Kahneman and Amos Tversky, "Prospect Theory: An Analysis of Desicion under Risk," Econometrica, Vol. 47, No. 2, pp. 263-291, 1979. https://doi.org/10.2307/1914185
  2. Amos Tversky and Daniel Kahneman, "Advances in Prospect Theory: Cumulative Representation of Uncertainty," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Vol. 5, No. 4, pp. 297-323, 1992. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00122574
  3. Woon Youl Choi, Kun Kyong Lee, Seong Hoon Jeong, "An Empirical Study of the Disposition Effect in the Behavioral Finance," Korean Journal of Financial Studies, Vol. 33, Issue 2, pp. 83-105, 2004.
  4. Seung Jo Han, "An Effect of Personality Type on Cognitive, Behavioral Investment Disposition," The Journal of Digital Policy & Management, Vol. 14, Issue 7, pp. 127-133, 2016.
  5. Seyoung Gauhk and Hanjong We, "The Prospect Theory and Capital Market Studies," Industrial Management Review, Vol. 28, No. 1, pp. 143-160, 2005.
  6. Colin Camerer, "Prospect Theory in the Wild: Evidence from the Field", California Institute of Technology Social Science Working Paper, 1998.
  7. N. Barberis, M. Huang and T. Santos, "Prospect Theory and Asset Prices", Quarterly Journal of Economics, Vol. 116, Issue 1, pp. 1-53, 2001. https://doi.org/10.1162/003355301556310
  8. Shlomo Benartzi and R. Thaler, "Myopic Loss Aversion and the Equity Premium Puzzle", Quarterly Journal of Economics, Vol. 110, Issue 1, pp. 73-92, 1995. https://doi.org/10.2307/2118511
  9. Dale Griffin and A. Tversky, "The Weighing of Evidence and the Determinants of Overconfidence", Cognitive Psychology, Vol. 24, Issue 3, pp. 411-435, 1992. https://doi.org/10.1016/0010-0285(92)90013-R
  10. Susan K. Laury and Charles A. Holt, "Further Reflections on the Reflection Effect," Research in Experimental Economics, pp. 405-440, 2008.
  11. Adrian Bruhin, Helga Fehr-Duda and Thomas Epper, "Risk and Rationality; Uncovering Heterogeneity in Probability Distortion," Econometrica, Vol. 78, No. 4, pp. 1375-1412, 2010. https://doi.org/10.3982/ECTA7139
  12. Glenn Harrison and E. Rutstrom, "Risk Aversion in the Laboratory," Research in Experimental Economics, pp. 41-196, 2008.
  13. F. Gul, "A Theory of Disappointment in Decision Making under Uncertainty", Econometrica Vol. 59, pp. 667-686, 1991. https://doi.org/10.2307/2938223
  14. C. Heath and A. Tversky, "Preference and Belief: Ambiguity and Competence in Choice under Uncertainty", Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Vol. 4, pp. 5-28, 1991. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00057884
  15. T. Odean, "Are Investors Reluctant to Realize Their Losses?", Journal of Finance, Vol. 53, pp. 1775-1798, 1998. https://doi.org/10.1111/0022-1082.00072