A dynamic, stochastic, computational model of preference reversal phenomena

Psychological Review

Volumn 112, Issue 4, 2005, Pages 841-861

  Johnson, Joseph G ^a,c   Busemeyer, Jerome R ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF ILLINOIS AT URBANA CHAMPAIGN   (United States)

^b INDIANA UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^c MIAMI UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

Anchoring and adjustment; Dynamic decision models; Preference reversals; Pricing; Stochastic choice models

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; HUMAN; PSYCHOLOGICAL MODEL; STATISTICS;

HUMANS; MODELS, PSYCHOLOGICAL; STOCHASTIC PROCESSES;

EID: 27944447000     PISSN: 0033295X     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1037/0033-295X.112.4.841     Document Type: Article

References (75)

1. Allais, M. (1953). Le comportement de l'homme rationnel devant le risque: Critique des postulats et axiomes de l'école américaine. [Rational man's behavior in the presence of risk: Critique of the postulates and axioms of the American school]. Econometrica, 21, 503-546.
2. Anderson, N. H. (1996). A functional theory of cognition. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
3. Bell, D. E. (1982). Regret in decision making under uncertainty. Operations Research, 30, 961-981.
4. Bhattacharya, R. N., & Waymire, E. C. (1990). Stochastic processes with applications. New York: Wiley.
5. Birnbaum, M. H. (1992). Violations of monotonicity and contextual effects in choice-based certainty equivalents. Psychological Science, 3, 310-314.
6. Birnbaum, M. H. (2004). Causes of Allais common consequence paradoxes: An experimental dissection. Journal of Mathematical Psychology, 48, 87-106.
7. Birnbaum, M. H., & Beeghley, D. (1997). Violations of branch independence in judgments of the value of gambles. Psychological Science, 8(2), 87-94.
8. Birnbaum, M. H., Coffey, G., Mellers, B. A., & Weiss, R. (1992). Utility measurement: Configurai weight theory and the judge's point of view. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 18, 331-346.
9. Birnbaum, M. H., & Stegner, S. E. (1979). Source credibility in social judgment: Bias, expertise, and the judge's point of view. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 37, 48-74.
10. Birnbaum, M. H., & Sutton, S. E. (1992). Scale convergence and utility measurement. Organizational Behavior & Human Decision Processes, 52, 183-215.
11. Birnbaum, M. H., & Zimmermann, J. M. (1998). Buying and selling prices of investments: Configurai weight model of interactions predicts violations of joint independence. Organizational Behavior & Human Decision Processes, 74, 145-187.
12. Bostic, R., Herrnstein, R. J., & Luce, R. D. (1990). The effect on the preference-reversal phenomenon of using choice indifference. Journal of Economic Behavior and Organization, 13, 193-212.
13. Busemeyer, J. R., & Goldstein, D. (1992). Linking together different measures of preference: A dynamic model of matching derived from decision field theory. Organizational Behavior & Human Decision Processes, 52, 370-396.
14. Busemeyer, J. R., & Johnson, J. G. (2004). Computational models of decision making. In D. Koehler & N. Harvey (Eds.), Handbook of judgment and decision making (pp. 133-154). Cambridge, MA: Blackwell.
15. Busemeyer, J. R., & Townsend, J. T. (1992). Fundamental derivations from decision field theory. Mathematical Social Sciences, 23, 255-282.
16. Busemeyer, J. R., & Townsend, J. T. (1993). Decision field theory: A dynamic-cognitive approach to decision making in an uncertain environment. Psychological Review, 100, 432-459.
17. Casey, J. T. (1991). Reversal of the preference reversal phenomenon. Organizational Behavior & Human Decision Processes, 48, 224-251.
18. Cox, J. C., & Grether, D. M. C. (1996). The preference reversal phenomenon: Response mode, markets and incentives. Economic Theory, 7, 381-405.
19. Diederich, A. (2003). MDFT account of decision making under time pressure. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 10, 157-166.
20. Diederich, A., & Busemeyer, J. R. (2003). Simple matrix methods for analyzing diffusion models of choice probability, choice response time, and simple response time. Journal of Mathematical Psychology, 47, 304-322.
21. Erev, I., & Baron, G. (2003). On adaptation, maximization, and reinforcement learning among cognitive strategies. Unpublished manuscript.
22. Fischer, G. W., & Hawkins, S. A. (1993). Strategy compatibility, scale compatibility, and the prominence effect. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 19, 580-597.
23. Fishburn, P. C. (1982). Nontransitive measurable utility. Journal of Mathematical Psychology, 26, 31-67.
24. Ganzach, Y. (1996). Preference reversals in equal-probability gambles: A case for anchoring and adjustment. Journal of Behavioral Decision Making, 9(2), 95-109.
25. Garner, W. R., Hake, H. W., & Eriksen, C. W. (1956). Operationism and the concept of perception. Psychological Review, 63, 149-159.
26. Goldstein, W. M., & Einhorn, H. J. (1987). Expression theory and the preference reversal phenomena. Psychological Review, 94, 236-254.
27. Green, D. M., & Swets, J. A. (1966). Signal detection theory and psychophysics. Oxford, England: Wiley.
28. Grether, D. M., & Plott, C. R. (1979). Economic theory of choice and the preference reversal phenomenon. American Economic Review, 69, 623-638.
29. Harless, D. W. (1989). More laboratory evidence on the disparity between willingness to pay and compensation demanded. Journal of Economic Behavior and Organization, 11, 359-379.
30. Hershey, J. C., & Schoemaker, P. J. (1985). Probability versus certainty equivalence methods in utility measurement: Are they equivalent? Management Science, 31, 1213-1231.
31. Horowitz, J. K., & McConnell, K. E. (2002). A review of WTA/WTP studies. Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, 44, 426-447.
32. Hsee, C. K., Loewenstein, G. F., Blount, S., & Bazerman, M. H. (1999). Preference reversals between joint and separate evaluations of options: A review and theoretical analysis. Psychological Bulletin, 125, 576-590.
33. Jessup, R. K., Johnson, J. G., & Busemeyer, J. R. (2004). An exploration of preference reversals using a within-subjects design. Unpublished working paper.
34. Johnson, J. G. (2004). Preference, process, and parsimony: A comprehensive account of robust preference reversal phenomena. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Indiana University.
35. Johnson, J. G., & Busemeyer, J. R. (2005). Rule-based decision field theory: A dynamic computational model of transitions among decision-making strategies. In T. Betsch & S. Haberstroh (Eds.), The routines of decision making (pp. 3-20). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
36. Kahneman, D., Knetsch, J. L., & Thaler, R. H. (1990). Experimental tests of the endowment effect and the Coase theorem. Journal of Political Economy, 98, 1325-1348.
37. Kahneman, D., & Tversky, A. (1979). Prospect theory: An analysis of decision under risk. Econometrica, 47, 263-291.
38. Keeney, R. L., & Raiffa, H. (1976). Decisions with multiple objectives: Preference and value tradeoffs. New York: Wiley.
39. Laming, D. R. (1968). Information theory of choice reaction times. New York: Academic Press.
40. Lichtenstein, S., & Slovic, P. (1971). Reversals of preference between bids and choices in gambling decisions. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 89, 46-55.
41. Lindman, H. R. (1971). Inconsistent preferences among gambles. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 89, 390-397.
42. Link, S. W., & Heath, R. A. (1975). A sequential theory of psychological discrimination. Psychometrika, 40, 77-105.
43. Loomes, G., Starmer, C., & Sugden, R. (1989). Preference reversal: Information-processing effect or rational non-transitive choice? Economic Journal, 99, 140-151.
44. Loomes, G., & Sugden, R. (1982). Regret theory: An alternative theory of rational choice under uncertainty. Economic Journal, 92, 805-824.
45. Loomes, G., & Sugden, R. (1983). A rationale for preference reversal. American Economic Review, 73, 404-411.
46. Luce, R. D. (2000). Utility of gains and losses. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
47. Mellers, B. A., & Chang, S. (1994). Representations of risk judgments. Organizational Behavior & Human Decision Processes, 57, 167-184.
48. Mellers, B. A., Chang, S., Birnbaum, M. H., & Ordoñez, L. D. (1992). Preferences, prices, and ratings in risky decision making. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 18, 347-361.
49. Mellers, B. A., Ordoñez, L., & Birnbaum, M. H. (1992). A change-of-process theory for contextual effects and preference reversals in risky decision making. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 52, 331-369.
50. Payne, J. W., Bettman, J. R., & Johnson, E. J. (1992). Behavioral decision research: A constructive processing perspective. Annual Review of Psychology, 43, 87-131.
51. Payne, J. W., Bettman, J. R., & Johnson, E. J. (1993). The adaptive decision maker. New York: Cambridge University Press.
52. Plott, C. R. (1996). Rational individual behavior in markets and social processes: The discovered preference hypothesis. In K. Arrow, E. Collombatto, M. Perlaman, & C. Schmidt (Eds.), The rational foundations of economic behaviour (pp. 225-250). London: Macmillan.
53. Raiffa, H. (1968). Decision analysis: Introductory lectures on choices under uncertainty. Oxford, England: Addison Wesley.
54. Ratcliff, R. (1978). A theory of memory retrieval. Psychological Review, 85, 59-108.
55. Roe, R. M., Busemeyer, J. R., & Townsend, J. T. (2001). Multi-alternative decision field theory: A dynamic connectionist model of decision-making. Psychological Review, 108, 370-392.
56. Schkade, D. A., & Johnson, E. J. (1989). Cognitive processes in preference reversals. Organizational Behavior & Human Decision Processes, 44, 203-231.
57. Seidl, C. (2001). Preference reversal. Journal of Economic Surveys, 16, 621-655.
58. Shafir, E. (1993). Choosing versus rejecting: Why some options are both better and worse than others. Memory & Cognition, 21, 546-556.
59. Shiffrin, R. M., & Thompson, M. (1988). Moments of transition: Additive random variables defined on finite, regenerative random processes. Journal of Mathematical Psychology, 32, 313-340.
60. Slovic, P. (1995). The construction of preference. American Psychologist, 50, 364-371.
61. Slovic, P., Griffin, D., & Tversky, A. (1990). Compatibility effects in judgment and choice. In R. M. Hogarth (Ed.), Insights in decision making: A tribute to Hillel J. Einhorn (pp. 5-27). Chicago: University of Chicago.
62. Slovic, P., & Lichtenstein, S. (1968). Importance of variance preferences in gambling decisions. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 78, 646-654.
63. Slovic, P., & Lichtenstein, S. (1983). Preference reversals: A broader perspective. American Economic Review, 73, 596-605.
64. Smith, P. L. (1995). Psychophysically principled models of visual simple reaction time. Psychological Review, 102, 567-593.
65. Stalmeier, P. F., Wakker, P. P., & Bezembinder, T. G. (1997). Preference reversals: Violations of unidimensional procedure invariance. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 23, 1196-1205.
66. Sterman, J. D. (1987). Testing behavioral simulation models by direct experiment. Management Science, 33, 1572-1592.
67. Townsend, J. T., & Busemeyer, J. R. (1995). Dynamic representation of decision-making. In R. F. Port & T. Van Gelder (Eds.), Mind as motion (pp. 101-120). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
68. Tversky, A., & Kahneman, D. (1991). Loss aversion in riskless choice: A reference dependent model. Quarterly Journal of Economics, 106, 1039-1061.
69. Tversky, A., & Kahneman, D. (1992). Advances in prospect theory: Cumulative representations of uncertainty. Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, 5, 297-323.
70. Tversky, A., Sattath, S., & Slovic, P. (1988). Contingent weighting in judgment and choice. Psychological Review, 95, 371-384.
71. Tversky, A., Slovic, P., & Kahneman, D. (1990). The causes of preference reversal. American Economic Review, 80, 204-217.
72. Usher, M., & McClelland, J. L. (2001). The time course of perceptual choice: The leaky, competing accumulator model. Psychological Review, 102, 550-592.
73. von Neumann, J., & Morgenstern, O. (1944). Theory of games and economic behavior. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
74. Weber, E. U., Anderson, C. J., & Birnbaum, M. H. (1992). A theory of perceived risk and attractiveness. Organizational Behavior & Human Decision Processes, 52, 492-523.
75. Weber, E. U., Shafir, S., & Blais, A.-R. (2004). Predicting risk sensitivity in humans and lower animals: Risk as variance or coefficient of variation. Psychological Review, 111, 430-445.