Equate-to-differentiate: The role of shared and unique features in the judgment process

Australian Journal of Psychology

Volumn 53, Issue 2, 2001, Pages 109-118

  Li, Shu ^a,b  

^a NANYANG TECHNOLOGICAL UNIVERSITY   (Singapore)

^b NANYANG TECHNOLOGICAL UNIVERSITY   (Singapore)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 0035615832     PISSN: 00049530     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/00049530108255131     Document Type: Article

References (38)

1. Allais, M. (1953). Le comportement de l'homme rationnel devant le risque: Critique des postulats et axiomes de l'ecole Americaine. Econometrica, 21, 503-546.
2. Allais, M. (1986). The general theory of random choices in relation to the invariant cardinal utility function and the specific probability function (Working paper No. C4475). Paris, France: Centre d'Analyse Economique, Ecole des Mines.
3. Allais, M. (1991). An outline of my main contributions to economic science (Nobel Lecture). Theory and Decision, 30, 1-26.
4. Birnbaum, M., & McIntosh, W.R. (1996). Violations of branch independence in choice between gambles. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 67, 91-110.
5. Conlisk, J. (1989). Three variants on the Allais example. American Economic Review, 79, 392-407.
6. Hogarth, R.M., & Einhorn, H.J. (1990). Venture theory: Model of decision weights. Management Science, 36, 780-803.
7. Houston, D.A., & Roskos-Ewoldsen, D.R. (1998). Cancellation and focus model of choice and preferences for political candidates. Basic and Applied Social Psychology, 20, 305-312.
8. Houston, D.A., & Sherman, S.J. (1995). Cancellation and focus: The role of shared and unique features in the choice process. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 31, 357-378.
9. Houston, D.A, Sherman, S.J., & Baker, S.M. (1991). Feature matching, unique features, and the dynamics of the choice process: Predecision conflict and postdecision satisfaction. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 27, 411-430.
10. Howard, R.A., & Matheson, J.E. (1984). Influence diagrams. In R.A. Howard & J.E. Matheson (Eds.), The principles and applications of decision analysis (Vol. II, pp. 719-762). Palo Alto, CA: Strategic Decision Group.
11. Keeney, R.L., & Raiffa, H. (1976). Decisions with multiple objectives: Preferences and value tradeoffs. New York: Wiley.
12. Li, S. (1994a). Equate-to-differentiate theory: A coherent bi-choice model across certainty, uncertainty and risk. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of New South Wales.
13. Li, S. (1994b). What is the role of transparency in cancellation? Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 60, 353-366.
14. Li, S. (1995). Is there a decision weight π? Journal of Economic Behavior and Organization, 27, 453-463.
15. Li, S. (1998). Can the conditions governing the framing effect be determined? Journal of Economic Psychology, 19, 135-155.
16. Li, S. (2001). Allais paradox: A behavioral explanation. Acta Psychologica Sinica, 33, 176-181.
17. Li, S., & Adams, A.S. (1995). Is there something more important behind framing? Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 62, 216-219.
18. Li, S., Fang, Y., & Zhang, M. (2000). What makes frames work? Acta Psychologica Sinica, 32, 229-234.
19. Lopes, L.L. (1984). Risk and distributional inequality. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 10, 465-485.
20. Lopes, L.L. (1987). Between hope and fear: The psychology of risk. Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, 20, 255-295.
21. Luce, R.D., & Krantz, D.H. (1971). Conditional expected utility. Econometrica, 39, 253-271.
22. Machina, M. (1987). Choice under uncertainty: Problems solved and unsolved. Journal of Economic Perspectives, 1, 121-154.
23. Quiggin, J. (1982). A theory of anticipated utility. Journal of Economic Behavior and Organization, 3, 323-343.
24. Reyna, V.F., & Brainerd, C.J. (1995). Fuzzy-trace theory: An interim synthesis. Learning and Individual Differences, 7, 1-75.
25. Savage, L.J. (1954). The foundations of statistics. New York: Wiley.
26. Shafir, E. (1994). Uncertainty and the difficulty of thinking through disjunctions. Cognition, 50, 403-430.
27. Shafir, E., & Tversky, A. (1992). Thinking through uncertainty: Nonconsequential reasoning and choice. Cognitive Psychology, 24, 449-474.
28. Tversky, A. (1969). Intransitivity of preferences. Psychological Review, 76, 31-48.
29. Tversky, A. (1972). Elimination by aspects: A theory of choice. Psychological Review, 79, 281-299.
30. Tversky, A., & Kahneman, D. (1981). The framing of decisions and the psychology of choice. Science, 211, 453-458.
31. Tversky, A., & Kahneman, D. (1983). Extensional versus intuitive reasoning: The conjunction fallacy in probability judgment. Psychological Review, 90, 293-315.
32. Tversky, A., & Kahneman, D. (1986). Rational choice and the framing of decisions. Journal of Business, 59, S251-S278.
33. Tversky, A., & Kahneman, D. (1992). Advances in prospect theory: Cumulative representation of uncertainty. Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, 5, 297-323.
34. Tversky, A., Sattath, S., & Slovic, P. (1988). Contingent weighting in judgment and choice. Psychological Review, 95, 371-384.
35. Tversky, A., & Shafir, E. (1992). The disjunction effect in choice under uncertainty. Psychological Science, 3, 305-309.
36. von Neumann, J., & Morgenstern, O. (1947). Theory of games and economic behavior. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
37. von Winterfeldt, D., & Edwards, W. (1986). Decision analysis and behavioral research. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
38. Yaari, M.E. (1987). The dual theory of choice under risk. Econometrica, 55, 95-115.