When does duration matter in judgment and decision making?

Journal of Experimental Psychology: General

Volumn 129, Issue 4, 2000, Pages 508-523

  Ariely, Dan ^b   Loewenstein, George ^a  

^a CARNEGIE MELLON UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^b MASSACHUSETTS INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ADULT; ARTICLE; DECISION MAKING; FEMALE; HUMAN; MALE; MENTAL FUNCTION; PSYCHOLOGICAL MODEL; TIME;

ADULT; DECISION MAKING; FEMALE; HUMANS; MALE; MENTAL PROCESSES; MODELS, PSYCHOLOGICAL; TIME FACTORS;

EID: 0034547754     PISSN: 00963445     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1037/0096-3445.129.4.508     Document Type: Article

References (42)

1. Ariely, D. (1998). Combining experiences over time: The effects of duration, intensity changes and on-line measurements on retrospective pain evaluations. Journal of Behavioral Decision Making, 11, 19-45.
2. Ariely, D., & Carmon, Z. (2000). Gestalt characteristics of experienced profiles. Journal of Behavioral Decision Making, 13, 191-201.
3. Ariely, D., Loewenstein, G., & Prelec, D. (1999). Coherent arbitrariness: Duration-sensitive pricing of hedonic stimuli around an arbitrary anchor (Tech. Rep.). Cambridge, MA: Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Sloan School of Management.
4. Ariely, D., & Zauberman, G. (2000). On the making of an experience: The effects of breaking and combining experiences on their overall evaluation. Journal of Behavioral Decision Making, 13, 219-232.
5. Baumgartner, H., Sujan, M., & Padgett, D. (1997). Patterns of affective reactions to advertisements: The integration of moment-to-moment responses into overall judgments. Journal of Marketing Research, 34, 219-232.
6. Carmon, Z., & Kahneman, D. (1996). The experienced utility of queuing: Real time affect and retrospective evaluations of simulated queues (Tech. Rep.). Durham, NC: Duke University, Fuqua School of Business.
7. Chapman, G. (2000). Preferences for improving and declining sequences of health outcomes. Journal of Behavioral Decision Making, 13, 203-218.
8. Clark, H. H., & Schober, M. F. (1991). Asking questions and influencing answers. In J. M. Tanur (Ed.), Questions about questions: Inquiries into the cognitive bases of surveys (pp. 15-48). New York: Russell Sage Foundation.
9. Clark, H. H., & Wilkes-Gibbs, D. (1986). Referring as collaborative process. Cognition, 22, 1-39.
10. Elster, J., & Loewenstein, G. (1992). Utility from memory and anticipation. In G. Loewenstein & J. Elster (Eds.), Choice over time (pp. 213-234). New York: Russell Sage Foundation.
11. Fredrickson, B. L., & Kahneman, D. (1993). Duration neglect in retrospective evaluations of affective episodes. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 65, 44-55.
12. Grice, H. P. (1975). Logic and conservation. In P. Cole & J. L. Morgan (Eds.), Syntax and semantics 3: Speech acts (pp. 225-242). New York: Academic Press.
13. Grice, H. P. (1987). Studies in the ways of words. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
14. Herrnstein, R., Loewenstein, G., Prelec, D., & Vaughan, W. (1993). Utility maximization and melioration: Internalities in individual choice. Journal of Behavioral Decision Making, 6, 149-185.
15. Hoeffler, S., & Ariely, D. (1999). Constructing stable preferences: A look into dimensions of experience and their impact on preference stability. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 8, 113-139.
16. Hsee, C. K. (1996). The evaluability hypothesis: An explanation of preference reversals between joint and separate evaluations of alternatives. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 46, 247-257.
17. Hsee, C. K., & Abelson, R. P. (1991). Velocity relation: Satisfaction as a function of the first derivative of outcome over time. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 60, 341-347.
18. Hsee, C. K., Abelson, R. P., & Salovey, P. (1991). The relative weighting of position and velocity in satisfaction. Psychological Science, 2, 263-266.
19. Hsee, C. K., Loewenstein, G., Blount, S., & Bazerman, M. (1999). Preference reversals between joint and separate evaluations of options: A theoretical analysis. Psychological Bulletin, 125, 576-590.
20. Hsee, C. K., Salovey, P., & Abelson, R. P. (1994). The quasi-acceleration relation: Satisfaction as a function of the change of velocity of outcome over time. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 30, 96-111.
21. Kahneman, D., Fredrickson, B. L., Schreiber, C. A., & Redelmeier, D. A. (1993). When more pain is preferred to less: Adding a better end. Psychological Science, 4, 401-405.
22. Kahneman, D., & Miller, T. D. (1986). Norm theory: Comparing reality to its alternatives. Psychological Review, 93, 113-139.
23. Kahneman, D., Wakker, P. P., & Sarin, R. (1997). Back to Bentham?: Explorations of experienced utility. Quarterly Journal of Economics, 112, 375-405.
24. Katz, J., Redelmeier, D. A., & Kahneman, D. (1997, November). Memories of painful medical procedures. Paper presented at the American Pain Society Annual Scientific Meeting, Washington, DC.
25. Keren, G. (1993). Between- or within-subjects design: A methodological dilemma. In G. Keren & C. Lewis (Eds.), A handbook for data analysis in the behavioral sciences: Methodological issues. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
26. Loewenstein, G., & Prelec, D. (1991). Negative time preference. American Economic Review: Papers and Proceedings, 82, 347-352.
27. Loewenstein, G., & Prelec, D. (1993). Preferences for sequences of outcomes. Psychological Review, 100, 91-108.
28. Loewenstein, G., & Sicherman, N. (1991). Do workers prefer increasing wage profiles? Journal of Labor Economics, 9, 67-84.
29. Nowlis, S. M., & Simonson, I. (1997, May). Attribute-task compatibility as a determinant of consumer preference reversals. Journal of Marketing Research, 205-218.
30. Read, D., & Loewenstein, G. (1999). Enduring pain for money: Decisions based on the perception of memory of pain. Journal of Behavioral Decision Making, 12, 1-17.
31. Redelmeier, D. A., & Kahneman, D. (1996). Patient's memories of painful medical treatments - real-time and retrospective evaluations of two minimally invasive procedures. Pain, 66, 3-8.
32. Rinot, M., & Zakay, D. (1999). Attending to duration (Tech. Rep.). Tel Aviv, Israel: Tel Aviv University, Department of Psychology.
33. Ross, W. T., Jr., & Simonson, I. (1991). Evaluations of pairs of experiences: A preference for happy endings. Journal of Behavioral Decision Making, 4, 273-282.
34. Russell, A. W., & Schober, M. F. (1999). How beliefs about a partner's goals affect referring in goal-discrepant conversations. Discourse Processes, 27, 1-33.
35. Schreiber, C. A., & Kahneman, D. (2000). Determinants of the remembered utility of aversive sounds. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 129, 27-42.
36. Schwarz, N. (1996). Cognition and communication: Judgment biases, research methods, and the logic of conversation. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
37. Schwarz, N., & Clore, G. L. (1983). Mood, misattribution, and judgments of well-being: Informative and directive functions of affective states. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 45, 513-523.
38. Smith, A. (1976). An inquiry into the nature and causes of the wealth of nations. Oxford, England: Clarendon Press.
39. SoundEdit (Version 2.0.7) [Computer software]. (1997). San Francisco: Macromedia.
40. Stevens, S. S. (1975). Psychophysics: Introduction to its perceptual, neural, and social prospects. New York: Wiley.
41. Tversky, A. (1969). Intransitivity of preferences. Psychological Review, 76, 31-48.
42. Varey, C. A., & Kahneman, D. (1992). Experiences extended across time: Evaluation of moments and episodes. Journal of Behavioral Decision Making, 5, 169-185.