Not exact matches
The study, titled «Prospect Theory: An Analysis of Decision under
Risk,» found that loss
aversion «expresses the intuition that a loss of $ X is more aversive than a gain of $ X is attractive... for example, most respondents in a sample of undergraduates refused to stake $ 10 on the toss of a coin if they stood to win
less than $ 30.»
Meanwhile long rates are finally beginning to nudge higher despite demographic trends, structurally elevated
risk aversion, stubbornly low inflation, strong institutional demand for long - dated bonds and quantitative easing (although
less relevant to Canada).
The momentum drivers today — caution and
risk aversion — may be
less exciting than the promise of a new technology paradigm, but the consequent valuation disparity is roughly the same.
If anything, it happens
less than before, given ongoing consolidation and
risk aversion among publishers.
Meanwhile,
risk aversion had begun to decline and the stock market had begun to rise, such that pundits were talking more about stocks and
less about gold.
The momentum drivers today — caution and
risk aversion — may be
less exciting than the promise of a new technology paradigm, but the consequent valuation disparity is roughly the same.
But I'd wager there's far more
risk -
aversion and thus
less innovation taking place (formula - tweaking, really) as mainstream budgets have inflated like footballers» salaries.
Similiarly, if possibility theory admits that evidence can make an event «more likely», then the requirement to be able to rank scenario classes as more or
less likely than each other leads to something that looks a lot like probability in the end, and the debates about whether a
risk justifies action should depend on how one evaluates the evidence, and one's
aversion to
risk, rather than the terminology used to quantify
risk (or not).
«Rankings of law firms explains
less than ratings of law firms Main
Risk aversion and «scheissenbedauern»»