Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Classic corporate finance literature often emphasizes executive incentives, such as stock options, as a way to encourage risk-averse executives to adopt more risk-neutral stances. Behavioral finance studies also note the potential impact of personality variables. In a further step, the current study suggests the relevance of human biology, in the form of hormones, for predicting risk-taking. Experimental results affirm that stock-options contracts drive risk-neutral behavior, mainly due to a shift in focus from losses to gains. Among women, lower testosterone levels and higher cortisol levels encourage greater risk-taking; for men, the findings indicate an inverted U-shaped relationship between testosterone and risk-taking. These impacts are comparable in degree to the effects of contracts, for both their predictive power and economic effect. By establishing the impact of biological variables on risk-taking, this study emphasizes the need for a comprehensive behavioral approach to contract setting.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Desmoulins‐Lebeault et al. (2022) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: