↓ Skip to main content

Testosterone and Cortisol Jointly Predict the Ambiguity Premium in an Ellsberg-Urns Experiment

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Behavioral Neuroscience, April 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age

Mentioned by

twitter
4 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
2 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
32 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Testosterone and Cortisol Jointly Predict the Ambiguity Premium in an Ellsberg-Urns Experiment
Published in
Frontiers in Behavioral Neuroscience, April 2017
DOI 10.3389/fnbeh.2017.00068
Pubmed ID
Authors

Giuseppe Danese, Eugénia Fernandes, Neil V. Watson, Samuele Zilioli

Abstract

Previous literature has tried to establish whether and how steroid hormones are related to economic risk-taking. In this study, we investigate the relationship between testosterone (T) and cortisol (C) on one side and attitudes toward risk and ambiguity on the other. We asked 78 male undergraduate students to complete several tasks and provide two saliva samples. In the task "Reveal the Bag," participants expressed their beliefs on an ambiguous situation in an incentivized framework. In the task "Ellsberg Bags," we elicited from the participants through an incentive-compatible mechanism the reservation prices for a risky bet and an ambiguous bet. We used the difference between the two prices to calculate each participant's ambiguity premium. We found that participants' salivary T and C levels jointly predicted the ambiguity premium. Participants featuring comparatively lower levels of T and C showed the highest levels of ambiguity aversion. The beliefs expressed by a subset of participants in the "Reveal the Bag" task rationalize (in a revealed preference sense) their choices in the "Ellsberg Bags" task.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 32 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 32 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 7 22%
Student > Master 4 13%
Student > Doctoral Student 3 9%
Student > Bachelor 3 9%
Student > Ph. D. Student 3 9%
Other 7 22%
Unknown 5 16%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 6 19%
Medicine and Dentistry 3 9%
Economics, Econometrics and Finance 3 9%
Computer Science 2 6%
Neuroscience 2 6%
Other 5 16%
Unknown 11 34%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 12 May 2017.
All research outputs
#14,339,760
of 22,962,258 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Behavioral Neuroscience
#1,903
of 3,195 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#172,701
of 309,869 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Behavioral Neuroscience
#46
of 71 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,962,258 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 35th percentile – i.e., 35% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,195 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 11.3. This one is in the 36th percentile – i.e., 36% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 309,869 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 41st percentile – i.e., 41% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 71 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 29th percentile – i.e., 29% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.