Sign inSubmit
ArticleMetrics
Research Article · Free to read · Published 2 January 2014

DOES FRAMING AFFECT RISK ATTITUDE? EXPERIMENTAL EVIDENCE FROM CREDIT MARKET

Dmitry Vladimirovich Burakov1

American Journal of Applied Sciences, Volume 11, Issue 3, pp. 391–395 · doi.org/10.3844/ajassp.2014.391.395

6,718 accesses4,694 downloads2 citations (Crossref)Metrics
Cite Check for updates

Abstract

In this article we study the effect of framing on the attitude of lenders toward risk over a credit cycle and also review potential causes of negative framing when making decisions. Using an experimental setting, we present evidence of frame of losses’ significant impact on willingness to accept credit risk: In comparison with frame of gains, willingness to accept credit risk increases from 29% in frame of gains up to 77% in frame of losses. Among the main reasons leading to a shift in frames, changes in bargaining power and conflict of interests are proposed. Admitting the existence of negative framing in credit market helps explaining duration of credit crunches and excessive risk taking during the upward phases of credit cycle.

Licence and reuse

Free to read. This article carries the publisher’s copyright, as printed on it: © 2014 Science Publications. It is free to read; ask us before reusing it.

How to reuse this article

Responses (0)

Have a comment on this research? Sign in to respond. Responses are moderated and published with your name and affiliation; the authors are invited to reply. How we use your dataWrite a response

About this article

Cite this article

Burakov, D. V. (2014). DOES FRAMING AFFECT RISK ATTITUDE? EXPERIMENTAL EVIDENCE FROM CREDIT MARKET. American Journal of Applied Sciences, 11(3), 391–395. https://doi.org/10.3844/ajassp.2014.391.395

Licence
© Science Publications
Issue
Volume 11, Issue 3
Policies
Editorial independenceUse of generative AIData availabilityAppeals and complaints
Version
Version of record
DOES FRAMING AFFECT RISK ATTITUDE? EXPERIMENTAL EVIDENCE FROM CREDIT MARKETAmerican Journal of Applied Sciences · Volume 11, Issue 3 · pp. 391–395 · © Science PublicationsDownload