A theoretical and experimental appraisal of four risk elicitation methods
通过模拟和复制实验比较四种激励性风险诱导任务，发现任务间估计差异部分源于测量误差，且风险中性选项的存在能解释部分偏好差异。
Abstract The paper performs an in-depth comparison of four incentivised risk elicitation tasks. We show by means of a simulation exercise that part of the often observed heterogeneity of estimates across tasks is due to task-specific measurement error induced by the mere mechanics of the tasks. We run a replication experiment in a homogeneous subject pool using a between subjects one-shot design. Results shows that the task estimates vary over and above what can be explained by the simulations. We investigate the possibility the tasks elicit different types of preferences, rather than simply provide a different measure of the same preferences. In particular, the availability of a riskless alternative plays a prominent role helping to explain part of the differences in the estimated preferences.