際際滷

際際滷Share a Scribd company logo

Brain and behaviour newspaper article: Robert Smith

SalfordPsych
SalfordPsych

The document discusses how biological factors like gender and hormones may have contributed to the 2008 financial crisis. It notes that women are generally more risk-averse than men in financial decision-making. This is likely due to biological differences in hormone levels like testosterone between men and women. Higher testosterone is linked to greater risk-taking behavior in areas like investing. The document speculates that if the financial institutions had more women leaders, the crisis may have been less severe due to women's more cautious approach to financial risks.

1 of 6
Bankers Behaving Badly? For many people, the collapse of Lehman Brothers in September 2008 marked the beginning of what has been the longest and deepest financial crisis in living memory. Much has been written about the causes of the economic downturn and how the bankers got it so spectacularly wrong. Was it all a logical consequence of unfettered avarice and feckless trading? Or was there a more fundamental basis for the crash - the predominance of male bankers "behaving badly" (Peston. 2009)? Would we have experienced the crash if the Sisters had been at Lehman's helm? Do men and women have different attitudes to risk- taking and if so, would the credit crunch have been avoided if there had been more women in our financial institutions? To answer that question, we turn, not to the world of economics but to biopsychology. Trust me: Im a banker. Investment banks are complex organisations involved in, amongst other things, the trading of equities and derivatives to maximise profit by exploiting the differential between purchase and sale price. Bankers have to evaluate the uncertainty of the future returns that may be produced by an asset (Greenspan. 1999). Its a risky business. Given the high stakes, you might think that bankers would be involved in a cool, dispassionate assessment of an asset unencumbered by emotion and irrationality. Not so. The neuropsychologist Frank Coates has discovered that this assessment may be as much influenced by biological considerations as by the numerical evaluation of the asset itself (Coates et al. 2010) If youre choosing someone to look after your money, you might be interested in their financial acumen, academic qualifications and track record. But you should also be looking at
their gender. The simplest biological distinction that appears to make a difference in financial risk taking behaviour is whether your banker is male or female. Women are generally regarded as being more risk averse than men (Eckel and Grossman. 2002). This risk aversion applies not only to whether someone is more or less likely to harbour a desire to climb Mount Everest or single-handedly circumnavigate the globe but also to financial decision-making. A study by Bernasek and Shwiff (2001) found that women financiers were more cautious than men when it came to retirement investment planning. So why are men more predisposed to making financially riskier decisions than women? Research has shown that the action of steroid hormones and neurological differences between the sexes may explain male risk taking generally and be implicated in the realm of financial decision-making. Is your banker on steroids? Steroid hormones are naturally occurring in both men and women but are found in the bloodstream in different quantities. This difference in levels of steroid hormones such as testosterone, cortisol and oestradiol (Carlson. 2010) might account for the difference in risk taking between men and women. The finger of suspicion has been pointed at testosterone regulation as being a primary candidate for male and female risk taking behaviour (Apicella et al. 2008). Testosterone is often blamed for pub brawls and aggressive male driving but could it also be responsible for the financial crisis? Testosterone causes not only increased aggression but also increased confidence, reduced risk aversion, shortened reaction times and increased vigilance (Sapienza et al. 2009). Testosterone can, of course, change the behaviour of both men and women (Maxfield et al. 2010) but since women possess only 5 - 10% of the levels of circulating testosterone found in males (Meier-Pesti and Penz. 2008), would women financiers be equally susceptible to the effects of testosterone as their Show them you're a plutocrat male counterparts?
Would investing in Lehman Sisters have been a better bet? Of course, we can only speculate but several academic studies suggest that women are more cautious when it comes to taking risks, so might have looked after your money somewhat better than their male counterparts. In one such study involving male and female participants in a financial trading scenario, Sapienza et al. (2009) found that the male participants were less risk averse than the women, with those men having the highest levels of circulating testosterone displaying the lowest aversion to financial risk. Another study investigated the effect of testosterone on male risk taking: 98 male Harvard University students were placed in a simulated investment scenario. The result demonstrated that those men with higher levels of circulating testosterone were more likely to make riskier financial decisions (Apicella et al. 2008). A third study involved traders on a London trading floor: saliva samples were taken twice a day to ascertain testosterone levels. Acute increases in testosterone resulted in higher profits, but chronically raised testosterone levels reduced profits (Coates and Herbert, 2008). The scientists speculated that chronically high levels of testosterone enhanced impulsivity and reduced rational decision-making. And it gets worse. When one male perceives a challenge from another male, levels of testosterone increase in the blood stream, resulting in increased aggression (Archer, 2006). This doesnt bode well for men working in the heady world of the stock market; male traders may perceive the competitive banking environment as one where they are constantly challenged by their peers (Deaves et al. 2008). Under the influence of increased testosterone flows, this perception can lead to increased aggression, higher self- confidence but also reductions in their ability to assess risk. This increased confidence can lead to what Barber and Odean (2001) termed the 'male syndrome' when male overconfidence leads to greater self belief in their investment decisions even when they are very uncertain or are more likely to be wrong. So to ensure our future financial stability as a nation, should our financial institutions only employ women, those paragons of hormonal stability and financial rationality? Well, its not quite that simple. It has been shown that a women trader's oestrogen and progesterone levels are lower during menstruation, and so are less able to 'offset' the effects of testosterone. This means that a menstruating womans risk taking profile is similar to that of male traders (Chen et al. 2005; cited from Apicella et al. 2008, pg 388). Is Testosterone the only culprit? In addition to the activational effects of testosterone, it appears to have more insidious effects on the organisation and development of the prenatal and pubertal brain (Coates et al. 2009). It is the organisational effects of testosterone on the developing brain and the potential behavioural implications that are proving to be of
considerable interest to researchers. Recent studies have revealed that prenatal exposure to testosterone not only modifies the structure and function of the male brain (Sapienza et al. 2009) but it also appears to sensitize the developing brain to the effects of circulating testosterone that are manifest particularly after puberty (Breedlove and Hampson. 2002; cited in Coates et al. 2010. pg 336). How could this affect our bankers? Well, exposure to higher levels of prenatal testosterone has been implicated in increased competitiveness, aggression and sensation seeking in males (H旦nekopp et al. 2006). So how do we know if our bankers' brains have been forged in a testosterone rich prenatal environment? In a convenient but serendipitous coincidence the degree of prenatal testosterone exposure correlates well with the ratio of the length of the 2nd and 4th fingers (known as the 2D:4D ratio). Strangely this stems from the fact that finger development is influenced by the same genes (hoxa and hoxb genes) that also give rise to the formation of the penis (Kondo et al. 1997). Consequently males with a relatively longer 4th finger compared to their 2nd finger (a lower 2D:4D ratio) have been exposed to greater prenatal testosterone exposure (H旦nekopp et al. 2006). As would be expected women tend to have a higher 2D:4D ratio than do men. Employing this 2D:4D finger length differential has resulted in some interesting revelations. In one study involving a mixed group of 550 males and females participating in an investment scenario, high financial risk aversion was strongly correlated with a higher 2D:4D ratio, or in everyday parlance - the women (Sapienza et al. 2009). Similar findings were also discovered in a mixed sample of Swedish participants when again the possessors of the higher 2D:4D finger ratio - the women - were found to be far more risk averse (Dreber and Hoffman. 2007; cited in Apicella et al. 2008, pg 388). So is testosterone to blame for the financial crisis? So far the prosecution's evidence for testosterone being the principal factor in differences in male and female risk taking behaviour appears to be strong. But is it an open and shut case? Brain imaging techniques such as functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI), which 'measures' brain activity by comparing the magnetic 'signature' of oxygen rich and oxygen depleted blood, has revealed other possible culprits. One scientific study has shown that a particular area of the brain - the nucleus accumbens is active when financial gain is anticipated (Kuhnen and Knutson. 2005). When participants were presented with different investment choices, activation of the nucleus accumbens pre-empted financially risky decisions. This is interesting because the nucleus accumbens is also associated with so-called 'reward behaviours', including recreational drug use (Ikemoto and Panksepp. 1999). This raises the possibility that financial risk taking may
be addictive. But if this is the case why don't men and women display similar addictive traits? Here we come full circle to the action of testosterone, which in this case appears to encourage the transmission of the hormone dopamine in the nucleus accumbens (Coates et al. 2010). Dopamine heightens the rewarding feeling (Ikemoto and Panksepp. 1999) so could it be that women, with their lower testosterone levels, are likely to feel less pleasure when taking a potentially lucrative if risky financial decision than their male colleagues? In this respect Khunen and Knutson (2005) indicate that as result of the activation of the nucleus accumbens, irrational and risky decisions may be preferentially promoted. This raises the spectre that male bankers could become risk 'junkies'. So where do we go from here? It may be overly simplistic to attribute the recent financial crisis to the actions of male bankers or that the difference in risk male and female financial risk aversion is due solely to biology. As Meier-Pesti and Penz (2008) the interactions are complex and can't be easily disaggregated. Bearing in mind the turmoil and pain that resulted from the recent financial crisis wouldn't it be prudent to try an obvious experiment? As well as improving regulation and oversight, why not significantly increase the numbers of women bankers who may be able to moderate the biologically mediated excesses of the men? Isn't it time, as Ferrary (2009) suggests, to let the women securely marshal the world's finances? References Apicella, C. L., Dreber, A., Campbell, B., Gray. P. B., Hoffman, M., and Little, A. C. (2008). Testosterone and financial risk preference. Evolution and Human Behaviour. 29. pp 384 - 390. Archer, J. (2006). Testosterone and human aggression: An evolution of the challenge hypothesis. Neuroscience and Behavioural Reviews. 30. pp 319 - 345. Barber, B. M., and Odean, T. (2001). Boys will be boys: Gender overconfidence and common stock investment. The Quarterly Journal of Economics (February). pp 261 - 292. Bastian, V. A., Burns, N. R., and Nettlebeck, T. (2005). Emotional Intelligence predicts life skills, but not as well as personality and cognitive abilities. Personality and Individual Differences. 39. pp 1135 - 1145. Bernasek, A., and Shwiff, S. (2001). Gender, risk and retirement. Journal of Economic Issues. 35(2). pp 345 - 356. Carlson, N. R. (2010). Physiology of behaviour. Boston. Allyn and Bacon. Coates, J. M., and Herbert, J. (2008). Endogenous steroids and financial risk taking on a London trading floor. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. 105(6). pp 6167 - 6172.
Coates, J. M., Gunell, M., and Rustichini, A.(2009). Second-to-fourth digit ratio predicts success among high-frequency financial traders. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. 106(2). pp 623 - 628. Coates, J. M., Gunell, M., and Sarnyai, Z. (2010). From molecules to market: Steriod hormones and risk taking. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society. 365. pp 331 - 345. Deaves, R., L端ders, E., and Luo, G. Y. (2008). An experimental test of the impact of overconfidence and gender on trading activity. Review of Finance (January). pp 1 - 21. Eckel, C. C., and Grossman, P. J. (2002). Sex differences and statistical stereotyping in attitudes towards financial risk. Evolution and Human Behaviour. 23. pp 281 - 295. Ferrary, M. (2009). Why women managers shine in a downturn. Financial Times, 3 February. available at: http://www.generation-eurpope.eu.com/drupal_prev_v1/news/why-women-managers- shine-a-downturm-financial-times-02032009. (Accessed 5th October 2013) Greenspan, A. (1999). Measuring financial risk in the twenty-first century. Vital Speeches of the Day. 56(2). pp 34 - 36. H旦nekopp, J., Manning, J. T., and M端ller, C. (2006). Second to fourth digit length ratio (2D:4D) and adult sex hormone levels: New data and a meta-analytic review. Psychoneuroendochrinology. 32. pp 313 - 321 Ikemoto, S., and Panksepp, J. (1999). The role of nucleus accumbens dopamine in motivated behaviour: A unifying interpretation with special reference to reward seeking. Brain Research Reviews. 31. pp 6 - 41. Kondo, T., Z叩k叩ny, J., Innis, J. W., and Duboule, D. (2007). Of fingers, toes and penises. Nature. 390. pp 29. Kuhnen, C. M., and Knutson, B. (2005). The neural basis of financial risk taking. Neuron. 47. pp 763 - 770. Maxfield, S., Shapiro, M., Gupta, V., and Hass, S. (2010). Gender and risk aversion: Women, risk taking and risk aversion. Gender in Management: An International Journal. 25(7). pp 586 - 604. Meier-Pesti, K., and Penz, E. (2008). Sex or Gender? Expanding the sex-based view by introducing masculinity and femininity as predictors of financial risk taking. Journal of Economic Psychology. 29. pp 180 - 196 Peston, R. (2009). Why men are to blame for the credit crunch. (online blog). BBC. Available at: http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/robertpeston/2009/07/why_men_are_to_blame_ for_the_c.html. (Accessed 5th October 2013) Roberti, J. W. (2004). A review of behavioural and biological correlates of sensation seeking. Journal of Research in Personality. 30. pp 256 - 279. Sapienza, P., Zingales, L. and Mastripieri, D. (2009). Gender differences in financial risk aversion and career choices affected by testosterone. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. 106(36). pp 15268 - 15273.

More Related Content

Brain and behaviour newspaper article: Robert Smith

  • 1. Bankers Behaving Badly? For many people, the collapse of Lehman Brothers in September 2008 marked the beginning of what has been the longest and deepest financial crisis in living memory. Much has been written about the causes of the economic downturn and how the bankers got it so spectacularly wrong. Was it all a logical consequence of unfettered avarice and feckless trading? Or was there a more fundamental basis for the crash - the predominance of male bankers "behaving badly" (Peston. 2009)? Would we have experienced the crash if the Sisters had been at Lehman's helm? Do men and women have different attitudes to risk- taking and if so, would the credit crunch have been avoided if there had been more women in our financial institutions? To answer that question, we turn, not to the world of economics but to biopsychology. Trust me: Im a banker. Investment banks are complex organisations involved in, amongst other things, the trading of equities and derivatives to maximise profit by exploiting the differential between purchase and sale price. Bankers have to evaluate the uncertainty of the future returns that may be produced by an asset (Greenspan. 1999). Its a risky business. Given the high stakes, you might think that bankers would be involved in a cool, dispassionate assessment of an asset unencumbered by emotion and irrationality. Not so. The neuropsychologist Frank Coates has discovered that this assessment may be as much influenced by biological considerations as by the numerical evaluation of the asset itself (Coates et al. 2010) If youre choosing someone to look after your money, you might be interested in their financial acumen, academic qualifications and track record. But you should also be looking at
  • 2. their gender. The simplest biological distinction that appears to make a difference in financial risk taking behaviour is whether your banker is male or female. Women are generally regarded as being more risk averse than men (Eckel and Grossman. 2002). This risk aversion applies not only to whether someone is more or less likely to harbour a desire to climb Mount Everest or single-handedly circumnavigate the globe but also to financial decision-making. A study by Bernasek and Shwiff (2001) found that women financiers were more cautious than men when it came to retirement investment planning. So why are men more predisposed to making financially riskier decisions than women? Research has shown that the action of steroid hormones and neurological differences between the sexes may explain male risk taking generally and be implicated in the realm of financial decision-making. Is your banker on steroids? Steroid hormones are naturally occurring in both men and women but are found in the bloodstream in different quantities. This difference in levels of steroid hormones such as testosterone, cortisol and oestradiol (Carlson. 2010) might account for the difference in risk taking between men and women. The finger of suspicion has been pointed at testosterone regulation as being a primary candidate for male and female risk taking behaviour (Apicella et al. 2008). Testosterone is often blamed for pub brawls and aggressive male driving but could it also be responsible for the financial crisis? Testosterone causes not only increased aggression but also increased confidence, reduced risk aversion, shortened reaction times and increased vigilance (Sapienza et al. 2009). Testosterone can, of course, change the behaviour of both men and women (Maxfield et al. 2010) but since women possess only 5 - 10% of the levels of circulating testosterone found in males (Meier-Pesti and Penz. 2008), would women financiers be equally susceptible to the effects of testosterone as their Show them you're a plutocrat male counterparts?
  • 3. Would investing in Lehman Sisters have been a better bet? Of course, we can only speculate but several academic studies suggest that women are more cautious when it comes to taking risks, so might have looked after your money somewhat better than their male counterparts. In one such study involving male and female participants in a financial trading scenario, Sapienza et al. (2009) found that the male participants were less risk averse than the women, with those men having the highest levels of circulating testosterone displaying the lowest aversion to financial risk. Another study investigated the effect of testosterone on male risk taking: 98 male Harvard University students were placed in a simulated investment scenario. The result demonstrated that those men with higher levels of circulating testosterone were more likely to make riskier financial decisions (Apicella et al. 2008). A third study involved traders on a London trading floor: saliva samples were taken twice a day to ascertain testosterone levels. Acute increases in testosterone resulted in higher profits, but chronically raised testosterone levels reduced profits (Coates and Herbert, 2008). The scientists speculated that chronically high levels of testosterone enhanced impulsivity and reduced rational decision-making. And it gets worse. When one male perceives a challenge from another male, levels of testosterone increase in the blood stream, resulting in increased aggression (Archer, 2006). This doesnt bode well for men working in the heady world of the stock market; male traders may perceive the competitive banking environment as one where they are constantly challenged by their peers (Deaves et al. 2008). Under the influence of increased testosterone flows, this perception can lead to increased aggression, higher self- confidence but also reductions in their ability to assess risk. This increased confidence can lead to what Barber and Odean (2001) termed the 'male syndrome' when male overconfidence leads to greater self belief in their investment decisions even when they are very uncertain or are more likely to be wrong. So to ensure our future financial stability as a nation, should our financial institutions only employ women, those paragons of hormonal stability and financial rationality? Well, its not quite that simple. It has been shown that a women trader's oestrogen and progesterone levels are lower during menstruation, and so are less able to 'offset' the effects of testosterone. This means that a menstruating womans risk taking profile is similar to that of male traders (Chen et al. 2005; cited from Apicella et al. 2008, pg 388). Is Testosterone the only culprit? In addition to the activational effects of testosterone, it appears to have more insidious effects on the organisation and development of the prenatal and pubertal brain (Coates et al. 2009). It is the organisational effects of testosterone on the developing brain and the potential behavioural implications that are proving to be of
  • 4. considerable interest to researchers. Recent studies have revealed that prenatal exposure to testosterone not only modifies the structure and function of the male brain (Sapienza et al. 2009) but it also appears to sensitize the developing brain to the effects of circulating testosterone that are manifest particularly after puberty (Breedlove and Hampson. 2002; cited in Coates et al. 2010. pg 336). How could this affect our bankers? Well, exposure to higher levels of prenatal testosterone has been implicated in increased competitiveness, aggression and sensation seeking in males (H旦nekopp et al. 2006). So how do we know if our bankers' brains have been forged in a testosterone rich prenatal environment? In a convenient but serendipitous coincidence the degree of prenatal testosterone exposure correlates well with the ratio of the length of the 2nd and 4th fingers (known as the 2D:4D ratio). Strangely this stems from the fact that finger development is influenced by the same genes (hoxa and hoxb genes) that also give rise to the formation of the penis (Kondo et al. 1997). Consequently males with a relatively longer 4th finger compared to their 2nd finger (a lower 2D:4D ratio) have been exposed to greater prenatal testosterone exposure (H旦nekopp et al. 2006). As would be expected women tend to have a higher 2D:4D ratio than do men. Employing this 2D:4D finger length differential has resulted in some interesting revelations. In one study involving a mixed group of 550 males and females participating in an investment scenario, high financial risk aversion was strongly correlated with a higher 2D:4D ratio, or in everyday parlance - the women (Sapienza et al. 2009). Similar findings were also discovered in a mixed sample of Swedish participants when again the possessors of the higher 2D:4D finger ratio - the women - were found to be far more risk averse (Dreber and Hoffman. 2007; cited in Apicella et al. 2008, pg 388). So is testosterone to blame for the financial crisis? So far the prosecution's evidence for testosterone being the principal factor in differences in male and female risk taking behaviour appears to be strong. But is it an open and shut case? Brain imaging techniques such as functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI), which 'measures' brain activity by comparing the magnetic 'signature' of oxygen rich and oxygen depleted blood, has revealed other possible culprits. One scientific study has shown that a particular area of the brain - the nucleus accumbens is active when financial gain is anticipated (Kuhnen and Knutson. 2005). When participants were presented with different investment choices, activation of the nucleus accumbens pre-empted financially risky decisions. This is interesting because the nucleus accumbens is also associated with so-called 'reward behaviours', including recreational drug use (Ikemoto and Panksepp. 1999). This raises the possibility that financial risk taking may
  • 5. be addictive. But if this is the case why don't men and women display similar addictive traits? Here we come full circle to the action of testosterone, which in this case appears to encourage the transmission of the hormone dopamine in the nucleus accumbens (Coates et al. 2010). Dopamine heightens the rewarding feeling (Ikemoto and Panksepp. 1999) so could it be that women, with their lower testosterone levels, are likely to feel less pleasure when taking a potentially lucrative if risky financial decision than their male colleagues? In this respect Khunen and Knutson (2005) indicate that as result of the activation of the nucleus accumbens, irrational and risky decisions may be preferentially promoted. This raises the spectre that male bankers could become risk 'junkies'. So where do we go from here? It may be overly simplistic to attribute the recent financial crisis to the actions of male bankers or that the difference in risk male and female financial risk aversion is due solely to biology. As Meier-Pesti and Penz (2008) the interactions are complex and can't be easily disaggregated. Bearing in mind the turmoil and pain that resulted from the recent financial crisis wouldn't it be prudent to try an obvious experiment? As well as improving regulation and oversight, why not significantly increase the numbers of women bankers who may be able to moderate the biologically mediated excesses of the men? Isn't it time, as Ferrary (2009) suggests, to let the women securely marshal the world's finances? References Apicella, C. L., Dreber, A., Campbell, B., Gray. P. B., Hoffman, M., and Little, A. C. (2008). Testosterone and financial risk preference. Evolution and Human Behaviour. 29. pp 384 - 390. Archer, J. (2006). Testosterone and human aggression: An evolution of the challenge hypothesis. Neuroscience and Behavioural Reviews. 30. pp 319 - 345. Barber, B. M., and Odean, T. (2001). Boys will be boys: Gender overconfidence and common stock investment. The Quarterly Journal of Economics (February). pp 261 - 292. Bastian, V. A., Burns, N. R., and Nettlebeck, T. (2005). Emotional Intelligence predicts life skills, but not as well as personality and cognitive abilities. Personality and Individual Differences. 39. pp 1135 - 1145. Bernasek, A., and Shwiff, S. (2001). Gender, risk and retirement. Journal of Economic Issues. 35(2). pp 345 - 356. Carlson, N. R. (2010). Physiology of behaviour. Boston. Allyn and Bacon. Coates, J. M., and Herbert, J. (2008). Endogenous steroids and financial risk taking on a London trading floor. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. 105(6). pp 6167 - 6172.
  • 6. Coates, J. M., Gunell, M., and Rustichini, A.(2009). Second-to-fourth digit ratio predicts success among high-frequency financial traders. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. 106(2). pp 623 - 628. Coates, J. M., Gunell, M., and Sarnyai, Z. (2010). From molecules to market: Steriod hormones and risk taking. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society. 365. pp 331 - 345. Deaves, R., L端ders, E., and Luo, G. Y. (2008). An experimental test of the impact of overconfidence and gender on trading activity. Review of Finance (January). pp 1 - 21. Eckel, C. C., and Grossman, P. J. (2002). Sex differences and statistical stereotyping in attitudes towards financial risk. Evolution and Human Behaviour. 23. pp 281 - 295. Ferrary, M. (2009). Why women managers shine in a downturn. Financial Times, 3 February. available at: http://www.generation-eurpope.eu.com/drupal_prev_v1/news/why-women-managers- shine-a-downturm-financial-times-02032009. (Accessed 5th October 2013) Greenspan, A. (1999). Measuring financial risk in the twenty-first century. Vital Speeches of the Day. 56(2). pp 34 - 36. H旦nekopp, J., Manning, J. T., and M端ller, C. (2006). Second to fourth digit length ratio (2D:4D) and adult sex hormone levels: New data and a meta-analytic review. Psychoneuroendochrinology. 32. pp 313 - 321 Ikemoto, S., and Panksepp, J. (1999). The role of nucleus accumbens dopamine in motivated behaviour: A unifying interpretation with special reference to reward seeking. Brain Research Reviews. 31. pp 6 - 41. Kondo, T., Z叩k叩ny, J., Innis, J. W., and Duboule, D. (2007). Of fingers, toes and penises. Nature. 390. pp 29. Kuhnen, C. M., and Knutson, B. (2005). The neural basis of financial risk taking. Neuron. 47. pp 763 - 770. Maxfield, S., Shapiro, M., Gupta, V., and Hass, S. (2010). Gender and risk aversion: Women, risk taking and risk aversion. Gender in Management: An International Journal. 25(7). pp 586 - 604. Meier-Pesti, K., and Penz, E. (2008). Sex or Gender? Expanding the sex-based view by introducing masculinity and femininity as predictors of financial risk taking. Journal of Economic Psychology. 29. pp 180 - 196 Peston, R. (2009). Why men are to blame for the credit crunch. (online blog). BBC. Available at: http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/robertpeston/2009/07/why_men_are_to_blame_ for_the_c.html. (Accessed 5th October 2013) Roberti, J. W. (2004). A review of behavioural and biological correlates of sensation seeking. Journal of Research in Personality. 30. pp 256 - 279. Sapienza, P., Zingales, L. and Mastripieri, D. (2009). Gender differences in financial risk aversion and career choices affected by testosterone. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. 106(36). pp 15268 - 15273.