Tests of Cumulative Prospect Theory with graphical displays of probability
Journal Title: Judgment and Decision Making - Year 2008, Vol 3, Issue 7
Abstract
Recent research reported evidence that contradicts cumulative prospect theory and the priority heuristic. The same body of research also violates two editing principles of original prospect theory: cancellation (the principle that people delete any attribute that is the same in both alternatives before deciding between them) and combination (the principle that people combine branches leading to the same consequence by adding their probabilities). This study was designed to replicate previous results and to test whether the violations of cumulative prospect theory might be eliminated or reduced by using formats for presentation of risky gambles in which cancellation and combination could be facilitated visually. Contrary to the idea that decision behavior contradicting cumulative prospect theory and the priority heuristic would be altered by use of these formats, however, data with two new graphical formats as well as fresh replication data continued to show the patterns of evidence that violate cumulative prospect theory, the priority heuristic, and the editing principles of combination and cancellation. Systematic violations of restricted branch independence also contradicted predictions of “stripped” prospect theory (subjectively weighted additive utility without the editing rules).
Authors and Affiliations
Michael H. Birnbaum, Kathleen Johnson, and Jay-Lee Longbottom
Keywords
Related Articles
- EP ID EP677653
- DOI -
- Views 154
- Downloads 0
New findings on unconscious versus conscious thought in decision making: additional empirical data and meta-analysis.
Ninety-eight Australian students participated in a functional replication of a study published by Dijksterhuis et al. (2006). The results indicated that unconscious thought does not necessarily lead to better normative d...
How to measure time preferences: An experimental comparison of three methods
In two studies, time preferences for financial gains and losses at delays of up to 50 years were elicited using three different methods: matching, fixed-sequence choice titration, and a dynamic “staircase” choice method....
Overlap of accessible information undermines the anchoring effect
According to the Selective Accessibility Model of anchoring, the comparison question in the standard anchoring paradigm activates information that is congruent with an anchor. As a consequence, this information will be m...
Recognition-based judgments and decisions: What we have learned (so far)
This special issue on recognition processes in inferential decision making represents an adversarial collaboration among the three guest editors. This introductory article to the special issue’s third and final part come...
Behind the veil of ignorance: Self-serving bias in climate change negotiations
Slowing climate change will almost certainly require a reduction in greenhouse gas emissions, but agreement on who should reduce emissions by how much is difficult, in part because of the self-serving bias—the tendency t...