A psychological law of inertia and the illusion of loss aversion
Journal Title: Judgment and Decision Making - Year 2006, Vol 1, Issue 1
Abstract
The principle of loss aversion is thought to explain a wide range of anomalous phenomena involving tradeoffs between losses and gains. In this article, I show that the anomalies loss aversion was introduced to explain - the risky bet premium, the endowment effect, and the status-quo bias - are characterized not only by a loss/gain tradeoff, but by a tradeoff between the status-quo and change; and, that a propensity towards the status-quo in the latter tradeoff is sufficient to explain these phenomena. Moreover, I show that two basic psychological principles - (1) that motives drive behavior; and (2) that preferences tend to be fuzzy and ill-defined - imply the existence of a robust and fundamental propensity of this sort. Thus, a loss aversion principle is rendered superfluous to an account of the phenomena it was introduced to explain.
Authors and Affiliations
David Gal
Keywords
Related Articles
- EP ID EP677546
- DOI -
- Views 294
- Downloads 0
Choice-justifications after allocating resources in helping dilemmas
How do donors reason and justify their choices when faced with dilemmas in a charitable context? In two studies, Swedish students were confronted with helping dilemmas based on the identifiable victim effect, the proport...
Salient nutrition labels increase the integration of health attributes in food decision-making
Every day, people struggle to make healthy eating decisions. Nutrition labels have been used to help people properly balance the tradeoff between healthiness and taste, but research suggests that these labels vary in the...
Are patient decision aids effective? Insight from revisiting the debate between correspondence and coherence theories of judgment
Research endeavors to determine the effectiveness of patient decision aids (PtDAs) have yielded mixed results. The conflicting evaluations are largely due to the different metrics used to assess the validity of judgments...
Variations on anchoring: Sequential anchoring revisited
The anchoring effect, the assimilation of judgment toward a previously considered value, has been shown using various experimental paradigms. We used several variations of the sequential anchoring paradigm, in which a nu...
Better is worse, worse is better: Reexamination of violations of dominance in intertemporal choice
Recently, Scholten and Read (2014) found new violations of dominance in intertemporal choice. Although adding a small receipt before a delayed payment or adding a small delayed receipt after an immediate receipt makes th...