The nature of inconsistencies in two measures of risk preferences in a sample of young African South Africans

Figures & data

Table 1. Inconsistent responses in the lottery task by math score

Score	inconsistencies	Total	% Inconsistent
Total	150	1947	8%
0	57	128	45%
1	3	63	5%
2	11	161	7%
3	20	363	6%
4	24	494	5%
5	21	351	6%
6	14	387	4%

Table 2. Frequency of contradictions between revealed risk preferences and self-reported risk preferences

	Gender
Risk contradict	Male	Female
No contradiction	246 (43.54%)	360 (48.78%)	606
Contradiction	319 (56.46%)	378 (51.22%)	697
Total	565	738	1303

Table 3. Nature of contradictions between revealed risk preferences and self-reported risk preferences

	Gender
Risk contradict	Male	Female
S/R R.S + A/R R.A	233	256	489
All contradictions	319	378	697
Percentage	73,04%	67,72%	70,16%

(S/R R.S + A/R R.A—indicates participants who had self-reported their risk preference as risk seeking but revealed themselves to be risk averse in the hypothetical gamble.)

(All Contradictions—indicates all participants who had differences between their self-reported risk

preference and their revealed risk preference)

Table 4. Correlation matrix between revealed risk preference and self-reported risk preferences by mathematics score

Mathematical ability	Correlation
1	−0.08
2	0.08
3	0.10
4	0.07
5	−0.08
6	0.07
Overall	0.05

Table 5. Mathematics score and non-contradictory and contradictory measures of self-reported risk preferences and revealed risk preferences

	Math score	Total	-Non- Contradictory measures	Contradictory Measures
Poor	0	47	30 (64%)	17(36%)
	1	45	22 (49%)	23 (51%)
	2	108	53 (49%)	55 (51%)
	3	255	125 (48%)	130 (52%)
	4	343	166 (48%)	177 (52%)
	5	245	94 (38%)	151 (62%)
Good	6	269	116 (43%	153 (57%)
		1 312	606	706
		{1840}
			32,93%	38,37%	71,30%

Table 6. Determinants revealed risk preference

	Maths = Score			Maths = Passed
Column	1 (All)	2 (Males)	3 (Females)	4 (All)	5 (Males)	6 (Females)
Maths	0.015 (0.53)	0.014 (0.30)	0.012 (0.33)	−0.029 (0.31)	0.016 (0.12)	−0.065 (−0.51)
Female	0.099 (1.08)			0.095 (1.03)
Education	−0.010 (−0.40)	−0.008 (−0.24))	− 0.011 (−0.33)	−0.010 (0.40)	−0.008 (−0.40)	−0.011 (−0.34)
Marital stat	0.063 (0.45)	−0.029 (−0.13)	0.143 (0.78)	0.060 (0.43)	−0.027 (−0.13)	0.142 (0.77)
Children	−0.146 (−0.53)	−0.035 (−0.23)	−0.226* (−1.71)	−0.142 (1.43)	−0.033 (−0.22)	−0.219* (−1.67)
Age	0.035 (1.11)	0.078* (1.68)	−0.033 (−0.06)	0.035 (1.13)	0.079* (1.70)	−0.002 (−0.33)
N	1772	778	994	1773	778	995

*p < 0.1 ** p < 0.05; *** p < 0.01.

t statistics indicated in parentheses

Table 7. Determinants of self-reported risk preference

	Maths = Score			Maths = Passed
Column	1 (All)	2 (Males)	3 (Females)	4 (All)	5 (Males)	6 (Females)
Maths	0.097*** (3.29)	0.091* (1.95)	0.095** (2.52)	0.205** (2.16)	0.095 (0.67)	0.300** (2.32)
Female	−0.210** (−2.26)			−0.203** (−2.17)
Education	0.008 (0.35)	0.060 (1.73)	− 0.038 (−1.15)	0.007 (0.31)	0.060* (1.73)	−0.040 (−1.19)
Marital stat	−0.128 (−0.93)	−0.281 (−1.23)	−0.030 (−0.17)	−0.122 (−0.88)	−0.258 (−1.13)	−0.042 (0.25)
Children	−0.032 (−0.32)	0.105 (0.67)	−0.134 (−1.02)	−0.034 (−0.34)	0.155 (0.73)	−0.150 (−0.14)
Age	0.018 (0.58)	0.059 (1.26)	−0.014 (−0.33)	0.015 (0.46)	0.061 (1.29)	−0.023 (−0.54)
N	1727	760	967	1728	760	968

*p < 0.1 ** p < 0.05; *** p < 0.01.

t statistics indicated in parentheses

Table 8. Determinants of contradictory risk measures

	Maths = Score			Maths = Passed
Column	1 (All)	2 (Males)	3 (Females)	4 (All)	5 (Males)	6 (Females)
Maths	0.097*** (2.66)	0.069 (1.17)	0.100** (2.07)	0.145 (1.26)	−0.077 (−0.04)	0.241 (1.51)
Female	−0.197* (−1.73)			−0.198* (−1.73)
Education	0.011 (0.35)	0.001 (0.02)	0.019 (0.44)	0.008 (0.26)	−0.001 (−0.01)	0.014 (0.33)
Marital stat	−0.099 (−0.61)	0.041 (0.15)	−0.318 (−1.40)	−0.097 (−0.59)	0.050 (0.19)	−0.332 (−1.45)
Children	−0.048 (−0.41)	−0.127 (−0.67)	−0.123 (−0.75)	−0.038 (−0.32)	−0.119 (−0.62)	−0.125 (−0.77)
Age	0.103** (2.15)	0.042 (0.71)	0.118** (2.19)	0.084** (2.13)	0.044 (0.32)	0.119** (2.21)
N	1294	544	710	1295	544	711

*p < 0.1 ** p < 0.05; *** p < 0.01.

t statistics indicated in parentheses

Table A1. Mathematics score and revealed risk preference: all

Frequency
			Risk averse			Risk seeking
		Risk Index	1	2	3	4
	Maths score						Total
Poor	0		39 (54%)	11(15%)	7 (10%)	15 (21%)	72
	1		32 (53%)	11 (12%)	9 (15%)	9 (19%)	61
	2		91(59%)	19 (12%)	11 (7%)	33 (21%)	154
	3		195 (55%)	41(12%)	36 (10%)	84(24%)	356
	4		264 (55%)	48 (10%)	58 (12%)	111 (23%)	481
	5		185 (55%)	33 (10%)	44 (13%)	75 (22%)	337
Good	6		211 (56%)	40 (11%)	39 (10%)	88 (23%)	378
		Total	1017 (55%)	203 (11%)	204 (11%)	415 (23%)	1839

Table A2. Mathematics score and revealed risk preference: males

Frequency
			Risk averse			Risk seeking
		Risk Index	1	2	3	4
	Maths score						Total
Poor	0		12 (55%)	4(18%)	3 (14%)	3 (14%)	22
	1		14 (54%)	3 (12%)	4 (15%)	5 (19%)	26
	2		31(59%)	9 (17%)	2 (4%)	11 (21%)	53
	3		90 (57%)	16(10%)	16 (10%)	35(22%)	157
	4		116 (54%)	25 (12%)	28 (13%)	47 (22%)	216
	5		87 (55%)	15 (10%)	20 (13%)	36 (23%)	158
Good	6		103 (58%)	40 (8%)	20 (11%)	39 (22%)	176
		Total	453 (56%)	86 (11%)	93 (12%)	176 (22%)	808

Table A3. Mathematics score and revealed risk preference: females

Frequency
			Risk averse			Risk seeking
		Risk Index	1	2	3	4
	Maths score						Total
Poor	0		27 (54%)	7(14%)	4 (8%)	12 (24%)	50
	1		18 (51%)	8 (23%)	5 (14%)	4 (11%)	35
	2		60(59%)	10 (10%)	9 (9%)	22 (21%)	101
	3		105 (53%)	25(13%)	20 (10%)	40(25%)	199
	4		148 (56%)	23 (9%)	30 (11%)	64 (24%)	265
	5		98 (55%)	18 (10%)	24 (13%)	39 (22%)	179
Good	6		108 (53%)	26 (13%)	19 (9%)	49 (24%)	202
		Total	564 (55%)	117 (11%)	111 (11%)	239 (23%)	1031

Table A4. Mathematics score and self-reported risk preference: all

Frequency
			Risk averse		Risk seeking
		Self-reported risk	1	2	3
	Maths score					Total
Poor	0		22 (31%)	23(33%)	25 (36%)	70
	1		16 (27%)	14 (24%)	29 (49%)	59
	2		36(24%)	42 (28%)	72 (48%)	150
	3		84 (25%)	88(26%)	171 (50%)	343
	4		103 (22%)	126 (27%)	240 (51%)	469
	5		46 (14%)	84 (26%)	199 (61%)	329
Good	6		68 (18%)	113 (30%)	19 1(51%)	372
		Total	375 (21%)	490 (27%)	927 (52%)	1792

Table A5. Mathematics score and self-reported risk preference: male

Frequency
			Risk averse		Risk seeking
		Self-reported risk	1	2	3
	Maths score					Total
Poor	0		4 (18%)	10(46%)	8 (36%)	22
	1		8 (32%)	4 (16%)	13 (52%)	25
	2		7(14%)	19 (37%)	26 (50%)	52
	3		36 (24%)	38(25%)	76 (51%)	150
	4		34 (16%)	61 (29%)	118 (55%)	213
	5		20 (13%)	42 (27%)	92 (60%)	154
Good	6		29 (17%)	50 (29%)	94(54%)	173
		Total	138 (18%)	224 (28%)	427 (54%)	789

Table A6. Mathematics score and self-reported risk preference: female

Frequency
			Risk averse		Risk seeking
		Self-reported risk	1	2	3
	Maths score					Total
Poor	0		18 (38%)	13(27%)	17 (35%)	48
	1		8 (24%)	10 (29%)	16 (47%)	34
	2		29(30%)	23 (23%)	46 (47%)	98
	3		48 (25%)	50(26%)	95 (49%)	193
	4		69 (27%)	65 (25%)	122 (48%)	256
	5		26 (15%)	42 (24%)	107 (61%)	175
Good	6		39 (20%)	63 (32%)	97(49%)	199
		Total	237 (24%)	266 (27%)	500 (50%)	1003

Table A7. Frequency of contradictions between revealed risk preferences and self-reported risk preferences: extreme cases of most risk averse and most risk seeking

	Gender
Risk contradict	Male	Female
No Contradiction	55,25%	58.94%
Contradiction	44.75%	41.06%
Total	100,00%	100,00%

Table A8. Nature of contradictions between revealed risk preferences and self-reported risk preferences: extreme cases of most risk averse and most risk seeking

	Gender
Risk contradict	Male	Female
S/R R.S + A/R R.A	138	165	303
All Contradictions	165	207	372
Percentage	84%	80%	81%

(S/R R.S + A/R R.A—indicates participants who had self-reported their risk preference as

risk seeking and their actual revealed risk preference as risk averse)

(All Contradictions—indicates all participants who had differences between their self-reported risk

preference and their actual revealed risk preference)

Table A9. Contradictions between revealed risk preferences and self-reported risk preferences by mathematical ability: extreme cases of most risk averse and most risk seeking

Math score	Inconsistencies	Total	% Inconsistent
0	9	33	27%
1	12	27	44%
2	36	87	41%
3	63	172	37%
4	94	234	40%
5	82	154	53%
6	76	183	42%