Relative risk aversion models: How plausible are their assumptions?

This work examines the validity of two main assumptions relative risk-aversion models educational inequality. We compare Breen-Goldthorpe (BG) and Breen-Yaish (BY) in terms their about status maintenance motives beliefs occupational risks associated with decisions. Concerning first assumption, our contribution is threefold. First, we criticise assumption BG model that families aim only at avoiding downward mobility are insensitive to prospects upward mobility. argue loss-aversion proposed by BY a more realistic formulation status-maintenance motives. Second, propose implement novel empirical approach assess assumption. Third, present results based on sample lower secondary school leavers indicating sensitive both mobility, hypothesis empirically supported. As regards risky choice may not believe ambitious options entail less ones. evidence that, France, academic path perceived as option. conclude if restrictive removed, relative-risk aversion needs drive inequalities.