Table A2

Summary of the results of the statistical tests regarding the distinct degrees of PaRA across genders

TestTest explanationTest hypothesisTask1 (PaRA)
(Women = Men)
Task2 (PaRA)
(Women = Men)
Task3 (PaRA)
(Women = Men)
Women = Men (average of Pa-Tasks)Overall conclusion
Wilcoxon-Mann-Whitney testIt tests whether the distributions in two groups are the same (non-parametric)H0: Both distributions are the sameReject H0 at 10%
Prob>|z| = 0.0596
H1: Women≠Men
Confirm H1
Fail to Reject H0
Prob>|z| = 0.4128
H1: Women≠Men
Cannot Confirm H1
Reject H0 at 10%
Prob>|z| = 0.0299
H1: Women≠Men
Confirm H1
Reject H0 at 10%
Prob>|z| = 0.0687
H1: Women≠Men
Confirm H1
It shows that most designs as well as their average confirm that
Women’s PaRA ≠
Men’s PaRA
Kolmogorov-Smirnov equality-of-distributions testIt tests the equality of distributions (non-parametric)H0: Both distributions are the sameFail to Reject H0
Co. P-value = 0.525
H1: Women≠Men
Cannot Confirm H1
Fail to Reject H0
P-value = 0.622
H1: Women≠Men
Cannot Confirm H1
Reject H0 at 10%
P-value = 0.033
H1: Women≠Men
Confirm H1
Reject H0 at 10%
P-value = 0.073
H1: Women≠Men
Confirm H1
It shows that the 3rd design as well as the average of the designs confirm that
Women’s PaRA ≠
Men’s PaRA
Two-sample t-test for unpaired data (using mid-point CRRA’s)It tests the equality of the means of a normally-distributed variable for two independent groups (parametric)H0: The mean of the difference is zeroReject H0 at 10%
Prob(T > t) = 0.0249
H1: Women > Men
Confirm H1
Fail to Reject H0
Prob(T > t) = 0.2247
H1: Women > Men
Cannot Confirm H1
Reject H0 at 10%
Prob(T > t) = 0.0139
H1: Women > Men
Confirm H1
Reject H0 at 10%
Prob(T > t) = 0.0189
H1: Women > Men
Confirm H1
It shows that most designs as well as their average confirm that
Women’s PaRA >
Men’s PaRA
Regression analysis using ordered Probit modelIt estimates relationships between an ordinal dependent variable and one or more independent variable(s)
(An ordinal regression analysis)
H0: The difference between men’s degree of PaRA and that of women is zeroReject H0 at 10%
Prob>|z| = 0.035
Coef = −0.470
S.E. = 0.223
Z = −2.10
95% C.I. = [0.908, −0.032]
H1: Women > Men
Confirm H1
Fail to Reject H0
Prob>|z| = 0.527
Coef = −0.140
S.E. = 0.222
Z = −0.63
95% C.I. = [0.574, 0.294]
H1: Women > Men
Cannot Confirm H1
Reject H0 at 10%
Prob>|z| = 0.044
Coef = −0.452
S.E. = 0.224
Z = −2.02
95% C.I. = [0.891, −0.128]
H1: Women > Men
Confirm H1
Reject H0 at 10%
Prob>|z| = 0.096
Coef = −0.365
S.E. = 0.219
Z = −1.67
95% C.I. = [0.796, 0.065]
H1: Women > Men
Confirm H1
It shows that most designs as well as their average confirm that
Women’s PaRA >
Men’s PaRA

Source(s): Author’s own work

Table A3

Summary of the results of the statistical tests. Regarding the distinct degrees of PrRA across genders

TestTest explanationTest hypothesisTask4 (PrRA)
(Women = Men)
Task5 (PrRA)
(Women = Men)
Task6 (PrRA)
(Women = Men)
Women = Men (average of Pr-Tasks)Overall conclusion
Wilcoxon-Mann-Whitney testIt tests whether the distributions in two groups are the same (non-parametric)H0: Both distributions are the sameFail to Reject H0
Prob>|z| = 0.3597
H1: Women≠Men
Cannot Confirm H1
Fail to Reject H0
Prob>|z| = 0.2703
H1: Women≠Men
Cannot Confirm H1
Fail to Reject H0
Prob>|z| = 0.4776
H1: Women≠Men
Cannot Confirm H1
Fail to Reject H0
Prob>|z| = 0.1978
H1: Women≠Men
Cannot Confirm H1
It shows that under these three designs there is NOT strong evidence to suggest that
Women’s PrRA ≠ Men’s PrRA
Kolmogorov-Smirnov equality-of-distributions testIt tests the equality of distributions (non-parametric)H0: Both distributions are the sameFail to Reject H0
P-value = 0.613
H1: Women≠Men
Cannot Confirm H1
Fail to Reject H0
P-value = 0.267
H1: Women≠Men
Cannot Confirm H1
Fail to Reject H0
P-value = 0.973
H1: Women≠Men
Cannot Confirm H1
Fail to Reject H0
P-value = 0.776
H1: Women≠Men
Cannot Confirm H1
It shows that under these three designs there is NOT much evidence to suggest that
Women’s PrRA ≠ Men’s PrRA
Two-sample t-test for unpaired data (using mid-point CRRA’s)It tests the equality of the means of a normally-distributed variable for two independent groups (parametric)H0: The mean of the difference is zeroFail to Reject H0
Prob(T < t) = 0.3098
H1: Women≠Men
Cannot Confirm H1
Reject H0 at 10%
Prob(T < t) = 0.0932
H1: Women≠Men
Confirm H1
Fail to Reject H0
Prob(T < t) = 0.2039
H1: Women≠Men
Cannot Confirm H1
Fail to Reject H0
Prob(T < t) = 0.1315
H1: Women≠Men
Cannot Confirm H1
It shows that under these three designs (except for Task 5) there is NOT strong evidence to suggest that
Women’s PrRA < Men’s PrRA
Regression analysis using ordered Probit modelIt estimates relationships between an ordinal dependent variable and one or more independent variable(s)
(An ordinal regression analysis)
H0: The difference between men’s degree of PrRA and that of women is zeroFail to Reject H0
Prob>|z| = 0.319
Coef = 0.221
S.E. = 0.222
Z = 1.00
95% C.I. = [0.214, 0.655]
H1: Women≠Men
Cannot Confirm H1
Fail to Reject H0
Prob>|z| = 0.225
Coef = 0.267
S.E. = 0.221
Z = 1.21
95% C.I. = [0.165, 0.700]
H1: Women≠Men
Cannot Confirm H1
Fail to Reject H0
Prob>|z| = 0.326
Coef = 0.218
S.E. = 0.222
Z = 0.98
95% C.I. = [0.218, 0.654]
H1: Women≠Men
Cannot Confirm H1
Fail to Reject H0
Prob>|z| = 0.150
Coef = 0.313
S.E. = 0.218
Z = 1.44
95% C.I. = [0.114, 0.739]
H1: Women≠Men
Cannot Confirm H1
It shows that under these three designs, there is NOT strong evidence to suggest that
Women’s PrRA < Men’s PrRA
Table A4

Comparative analysis of PaRA and PrRA across contexts: key findings from three statistical tests for Men

TestTest explanationTest hypothesisMen
Task1 = Task6 (PaRA=PrRA)
Men
Task2 = Task5 (PaRA=PrRA)
Men
Task3 = Task4 (PaRA=PrRA)
Men
PaRA=PrRA (average of Pa- and Pr-Tasks)
Overall conclusion
Wilcoxon matched-pairs signed-ranks testIt tests the equality of matched pairs of observations (non-parametric)H0: Both distributions are the sameReject H0 at 10%
Prob>|z| = 0.0056
H1: PaRAM≠PrRAM
Confirm H1
Reject H0 at 10%
Prob>|z| = 0.0020
H1: PaRAM≠PrRAM
Confirm H1
Reject H0 at 10%
Prob>|z| = 0.0355
H1: PaRAM≠PrRAM
Confirm H1
Reject H0 at 10%
Prob>|z| = 0.0005
H1: PaRAM≠PrRAM
Confirm H1
It shows that all of the designs as well as their average confirm that
PaRAM≠PrRAM
Arbuthnott- Snedecor- Cochran sign testIt tests the equality of matched pairs of observations (non-parametric)H0: The median of the differences is zero (the true proportion of positive (negative) signs is one-half)Reject H0 at 10%
Prob(.) = 0.0243
H1: PaRAM≠PrRAM
Confirm H1
Reject H0 at 10%
Prob(.) = 0.0336
H1: PaRAM≠PrRAM
Confirm H1
Reject H0 at 10%
Prob(.) = 0.0652
H1: PaRAM≠PrRAM
Confirm H1
Reject H0 at 10%
Prob(.) = 0.0008
H1: PaRAM≠PrRAM
Confirm H1
It shows that all of the designs as well as their average confirm that
PaRAM≠PrRAM
Two-sample t-test for paired data (using mid-point CRRA’s)It tests if two variables have the same mean, assuming paired data (parametric)H0: The mean of the difference is zeroReject H0 at 10%
Prob(|T|>|t|) = 0.0027
PaRAM≠PrRAM
Confirm H1
Reject H0 at 10%
Prob(|T|>|t|) = 0.0005
PaRAM≠PrRAM
Confirm H1
Reject H0 at 10%
Prob(|T|>|t|) = 0.0460
PaRAM≠PrRAM
Confirm H1
Reject H0 at 10%
Prob(|T|>|t|) = 0.0005
PaRAM≠PrRAM
Confirm H1
It shows that all of the designs as well as their average confirm that
PaRAM≠PrRAM

Source(s): Author’s own work

Table A5

Comparative analysis of PaRA and PrRA across contexts: key findings from three statistical tests for Women

TestTest explanationTest hypothesisWomen
Task1 = Task6 (PaRA=PrRA)
Women
Task2 = Task5 (PaRA=PrRA)
Women
Task3 = Task4 (PaRA=PrRA)
Women
PaRA=PrRA (average of Pa- and Pr-Tasks)
Overall conclusion
Wilcoxon matched-pairs signed-ranks testIt tests the equality of matched pairs of observations (non-parametric)H0: Both distributions are the sameFail to Reject H0
Prob>|z| = 0.9818
H1: PaRAW≠PrRAW
Cannot Confirm H1
Fail to Reject H0
Prob>|z| = 0.3828
H1: PaRAW≠PrRAW
Cannot Confirm H1
Reject H0 at 10%
Prob>|z| = 0.0796
H1: PaRAW≠PrRAW
Confirm H1
Fail to Reject H0
Prob>|z| = 0.4669
H1: PaRAW≠PrRAW
Cannot Confirm H1
Most designs as well as their average confirms that
PaRAW and PrRAW are NOT statistically significantly different
Arbuthnott- Snedecor- Cochran sign testIt tests the equality of matched pairs of observations (non-parametric)H0: The median of the differences is zero (the true proportion of positive (negative) signs is one-half)Fail to Reject H0
Prob(.) = 1.0000
H1: PaRAW≠PrRAW
Cannot Confirm H1
Fail to Reject H0
Prob(.) = 0.5716
H1: PaRAW≠PrRAW
Cannot Confirm H1
Fail to Reject H0
Prob(.) = 0.1516
H1: PaRAW≠PrRAW
Cannot Confirm H1
Fail to Reject H0
Prob(.) = 0.8601
H1: PaRAW≠PrRAW
Cannot Confirm H1
All designs as well as their average confirms that
PaRAW and PrRAW are NOT statistically significantly different
Two-sample t-test for paired data (using mid-point CRRA’s)It tests if two variables have the same mean, assuming paired data (parametric)H0: The mean of the difference is zeroFail to Reject H0
Prob(|T|>|t|) = 0.7724
H1: PaRAW≠PrRAW
Cannot Confirm H1
Fail to Reject H0
Prob(|T|>|t|) = 0.5466
H1: PaRAW≠PrRAW
Cannot Confirm H1
Reject H0 at 10%
Prob(|T|>|t|) = 0.0652
H1: PaRAW≠PrRAW
Confirm H1
Fail to Reject H0
Prob(|T|>|t|) = 0.3736
H1: PaRAW≠PrRAW
Cannot Confirm H1
Most designs as well as their average confirm that PaRAW and PrRAW are NOT statistically significantly different

Source(s): Author’s own work

Table A6

Summary of statistical tests on payoff-risk premiums and price-risk premiums for Men

TestTest explanationTest hypothesisFor men: RPTask2 = RPTask5 (PaRPM = PrRPM)Overall conclusion
Wilcoxon matched-pairs signed-ranks testIt tests the equality of matched pairs of observations (non-parametric)H0: Both distributions are the sameReject H0
Prob>|z| = 0.0013
H1: PaRPM≠PrRPM
Confirm H1
It shows that
PaRPM ≠ PrRPM
Arbuthnott- Snedecor- Cochran sign testIt tests the equality of matched pairs of observations (non-parametric)H0: The median of the differences is zero (the true proportion of positive (negative) signs is one-half)Reject H0
Prob(.) = 0.0168
H1: PaRPM < PrRPM
Confirm H1
It shows that
PaRPM < PrRPM
Two-sample t-test for paired dataIt tests if two variables have the same mean, assuming paired data (parametric)H0: The mean of the difference is zeroReject H0
Prob(T < t) = 0.0002
H1: PaRPM < PrRPM
Confirm H1
It shows that
PaRPM < PrRPM

Source(s): Author’s own work

Table A7

Summary of statistical tests on payoff-risk premiums and price-risk premiums for Women

TestTest explanationTest hypothesisFor women: RPTask2 = RPTask5 (PaRPW = PrRPW)Overall conclusion
Wilcoxon matched-pairs signed-ranks testIt tests the equality of matched pairs of observations (non-parametric)H0: Both distributions are the sameFail to reject H0
Prob>|z| = 0.2588
H1: PaRPW≠PrRPW
Cannot Confirm H1
It shows that
PaRPW and PrRPW are NOT statistically significantly different
Arbuthnott- Snedecor- Cochran sign testIt tests the equality of matched pairs of observations (non-parametric)H0: The median of the differences is zero (the true proportion of positive (negative) signs is one-half)Fail to reject H0
Prob(.) = 0.5716
H1: PaRPW≠PrRPW
Cannot Confirm H1
It shows that PaRPW and PrRPW are NOT statistically significantly different
Two-sample t-test for paired dataIt tests if two variables have the same mean, assuming paired data (parametric)H0: The mean of the difference is zeroFail to reject H0
Prob(T < t) = 0.3627
H1: PaRPW≠PrRPW
Cannot Confirm H1
It shows that PaRPW and PrRPW are NOT statistically significantly different

Source(s): Author’s own work

or Create an Account

Close Modal
Close Modal