Context Effects: The Proportional Difference Model and the Reflection of Preference

Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning Memory and Cognition

Volumn 29, Issue 5, 2003, Pages 942-953

  González Vallejo, Claudia ^a   Reid, Aaron A ^a   Schiltz, Joel ^a  

^a OHIO UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; DECISION MAKING; DECISION THEORY; HIGH RISK BEHAVIOR; HUMAN; INDIVIDUALITY; INVESTMENT; LEARNING; STATISTICS;

CHOICE BEHAVIOR; DECISION MAKING; DECISION THEORY; HUMANS; INDIVIDUALITY; INVESTMENTS; JUDGMENT; PROBABILITY LEARNING; RISK-TAKING; STOCHASTIC PROCESSES;

EID: 0142073300     PISSN: 02787393     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1037/0278-7393.29.5.942     Document Type: Article

References (26)

1. Authorware (Version 3.0) [Computer software]. (1995). San Francisco: Macromedia.
2. Birnbaum, M., Patton, J., & Lott, M. (1999). Evidence against rank-dependent utility theories: Tests of cumulative independence, interval independence, stochastic dominance and transitivity. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 77, 44-83.
3. Bonazzi, A. (1991). Modeling intransitive preference among objects with transitively ordered attributes. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill.
4. Budescu, D. V., & Weiss, W. (1987). Reflection of transitive and intransitive preferences: A test of prospect theory. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 39, 184-202.
5. Erev, I., & Wallsten, T. S. (1993). The effects of explicit probabilities on decision weights and on the reflection effect. Journal of Behavioral Decision Making, 6, 221-241.
6. Fagley, N. S. (1993). A note concerning reflection effects versus framing effects. Psychological Bulletin, 113, 451-452.
7. Fagley, N. S., & Miller, P. M. (1987). The effects of decision framing on choice of risky vs certain options. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 39, 264-277.
8. Fagley, N. S., & Miller, P. M. (1990). The effect of framing on choice: Interactions with risk-taking propensity, cognitive style, and sex. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 16, 496-510.
9. González-Vallejo, C. (2002). Making trade-offs: A new probabilistic and context-sensitive model of choice behavior. Psychological Review, 1, 137-155.
10. González-Vallejo, C., Bonazzi, A., & Shapiro, A.J. (1996). Effects of vague probabilities and of vague payoffs on preference: A model comparison analysis. Journal of Mathematical Psychology, 40, 130-140.
11. Hershey, J. C., & Schoemaker, P. J. H. (1980). Prospect theory's reflection hypothesis: A critical examination. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 25, 395-418.
12. Jou, J. W., Shanteau, J., & Harris, R. J. (1996). The information processing view of framing effects: The role of causal schemas in decision making. Memory & Cognition, 24, 1-15.
13. Kahneman, D., & Tversky, A. (1979). Prospect theory: An analysis of decisions under risk. Econometrica, 47, 263-291.
14. Kühberger, A., Schulte-Mecklenbeck, M., & Perner, J. (1999). The effects of framing, reflection, probability, and payoff on risk preference in choice tasks. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 78, 204-231.
15. Levin, I. P., & Gaeth, G. J. (1988). How consumers are affected by the framing of attribute information before and after consuming the product. Journal of Consumer Research, 15, 374-378.
16. Lopes, L. L., & Oden, G. C. (1999). The role of aspiration level in risky choice: A comparison of cumulative prospect theory and SP/A theory. Journal of Mathematical Psychology, 43, 286-313.
17. Mandel, D. R. (2001). Gain-loss framing and choice: Separating outcome formulations from descriptor formulations. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 85, 56-76.
18. Nelson, T. O. (1984). A comparison of current measures of accuracy of feeling-of-knowing predictions. Psychological Bulletin, 95, 109-133.
19. Pitt, M. A., Myung, I. J., & Zhang, S. (2002). Toward a method of selecting among computational models of cognition. Psychological Review, 109, 472-491.
20. Schneider, S. L., & Lopes, L. L. (1986). Reflection in preferences under risk: Who and when may suggest why. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 12, 535-548.
21. Tversky, A. (1969). Intransitivity of preferences. Psychological Review, 76, 31-48.
22. Tversky, A., & Kahneman, D. (1981, January). The framing of decisions and the psychology of choice. Science, 211, 453-458.
23. Tversky, A., & Kahneman D. (1984). Choices, values, and frames. American Psychologist, 39, 341-350.
24. Tversky, A., & Kahneman, D. (1992). Advances in prospect theory: Cumulative representation of uncertainty. Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, 5, 297-323.
25. Wang, X. T. (1996). Framing effects: Dynamics and task domains. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 68, 145-157.
26. Wang, X. T., & Johnston, V. S. (1995). Perceived social context and risk preference: A re-examination of framing effects in a life-death decision problem. Journal of Behavioral Decision Making, 8, 279-293.