Explaining heterogeneity in utility functions by individual differences in decision modes

Journal of Economic Psychology

Volumn 27, Issue 3, 2006, Pages 386-401

  Schunk, Daniel ^a   Betsch, Cornelia ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF MANNHEIM   (Germany)

^b UNIVERSITY OF HEIDELBERG   (Germany)

Author keywords

Individual differences; Intuition; Risky decisions; Utility function elicitation; Value function

Indexed keywords

EID: 33646503223     PISSN: 01674870     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.joep.2005.08.003     Document Type: Article

References (37)

1. Abdellaoui M. Parameter-free elicitation of utility and probability weighting functions. Management Science 46 (2000) 1497-1512
2. Baron R.M., and Kenny D.A. The moderator-mediator variable distinction in social psychological research: Conceptual, strategic and statistical considerations. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 51 (1986) 1173-1182
3. Betsch C. Präferenz für Intuition und Deliberation. Inventar zur Erfassung von affekt- und kognitionsbasiertem Entscheiden [Preference for Intuition and Deliberation (PID): An Inventory for Assessing Affect- and Cognition-Based Decision-Making]. Zeitschrift für Differentielle und Diagnostische Psychologie 25 (2004) 179-197
4. Bless H., Betsch T., and Franzen A. The impact of context cues on solutions to the "asian disease" problem. European Journal of Social Psychology 28 (1998) 287-291
5. Breckler S.J. Empirical validation of affect, behavior, and cognition as distinct components of attitude. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 47 (1984) 1191-1205
6. Bruner J.S. Going beyond the information given. In: Gruber H.E., Hammond K.R., and Jessor R. (Eds). Contemporary approaches to cognition (1957), Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA 41-69
7. Chaiken S. Heuristic versus systematic information processing and the use of source versus message cues in persuasion. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 39 (1980) 752-766
8. Eisenführ F., and Weber M. Rationales Entscheiden. 4th ed. (2003), Springer, Heidelberg, Germany
9. Epstein S. Aggregation and beyond: Some basic issues on the prediction of behavior. Journal of Personality 51 (1983) 360-392
10. Farquhar P.H. Utility assessment methods. Management Science 30 (1984) 1283-1300
11. Fechner G.T. Elemente der Psychophysik (1860), Breitkopf und Härtel, Leipzig, Germany
12. Fetherstonhaugh D., Slovic P., Johnson S., and Friedrich J. Insensitivity to the value of human life: A study of psychophysical numbing. Journal of Risk and Uncertainty 14 (1997) 283-300
13. Glaser M., Nöth M., and Weber M. Behavioral finance. In: Koehler D.J., and Harvey N. (Eds). Blackwell handbook of judgment and decision making (2004), Blackwell, Oxford
14. Glaser, M., & Weber, M. (2005). Overconfidence and trading volume. Working Paper, University of Mannheim.
15. Gonzalez R., and Wu G. On the shape of the probability weighting function. Cognitive Psychology 38 (1999) 129-166
16. Hogarth R. Educating intuition (2001), University Press, Chicago
17. Hsee C.K., and Rottenstreich Y. Music, pandas, and muggers: On the affective psychology of value. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General 133 (2004) 23-30
18. Isen A.M., Nygren T.E., and Ashby F.G. Influence of positive affect on the subjective utility of gains and losses: It is just not worth the risk. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 55 (1988) 710-717
19. Johnson E.J., Payne J.W., and Bettman J.R. Information displays and preference reversals. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes 42 (1988) 1-21
20. Kahneman D., and Tversky A. Prospect theory: An analysis of decision under risk. Econometrica 47 (1979) 263-291
21. Kaufmann, M. (2003). Informations integration unter expliziter Einstellungsbildung [Information integration under explicit attitude formation]. Unpublished manuscript, University of Heidelberg.
22. Langan-Fox J., and Shirley D.A. The nature and measurement of intuition: Cognitive and behavioral interests, personality and experiences. Creativity Research Journal 15 (2003) 207-222
23. Loewenstein, G., & O'Donoghue, T. (2004). Animal spirits: Affective and deliberative processes in economic behavior. Working Paper, 5/4/2004. Carnegie Mellon University.
24. Loewenstein G., Weber E., Hsee C.K., and Welch E. Risk as feelings. Psychological Bulletin 127 (2001) 267-286
25. Mano H. Risk-taking, framing effects, and affect. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes 57 (1994) 38-58
26. Parker A., and Fischhoff B. Decision-making competence: External validation through an individual-differences approach. Journal of Behavioral Decision-Making 18 1 (2005) 1-27
27. Prelec D. Compound invariant weighting functions in prospect theory. In: Kahneman D., and Tversky A. (Eds). Choices values and frames (2000), Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK
28. Schwartz B., Ward A., Monterosso J., Lyubomirsky S., White K., and Lehman D.R. Maximizing versus satisficing: Happiness is a matter of choice. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 83 5 (2002) 1178-1197
29. Stanovich K.E., and West R.F. Individual differences in rational thought. Journal of Experimental Psychology 127 (1998) 161-188
30. Stanovich K.E., and West R.F. Individual differences in reasoning: Implications for the rationality debate. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 23 (2000) 645-726
31. Tversky A., and Fox C. Weighting risk and uncertainty. Psychological Review 102 (1995) 269-283
32. Tversky A., and Kahneman D. The framing of decisions and the psychology of choice. Science 211 (1981) 453-458
33. Tversky A., and Kahneman D. Advances in prospect theory: Cumulative representation of uncertainty. Journal of Risk and Uncertainty 5 (1992) 297-323
34. Verplanken B., Hofstee G., and Janssen H.J.W. Accessibility of affective versus cognitive components of attitudes. European Journal of Social Psychology 28 (1998) 23-36
35. Wakker P.P., and Deneffe D. Eliciting von Neumann-Morgenstern utilities when probabilities are distorted or unknown. Management Science 42 (1996) 1131-1150
36. Wright W.F., and Bower G.H. Mood effects on subjective probability assessment. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes 52 (1992) 276-291
37. Zajonc R.B. Feeling and thinking. Preferences need no inferences. American Psychologist 35 (1980) 151-175