Testing for intransitivity of preferences predicted by a lexicographic semi-order

Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes

Volumn 104, Issue 1, 2007, Pages 96-112

  Birnbaum, Michael H ^a   Gutierrez, Roman J ^a  

^a CALIFORNIA STATE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

Choice; Decision making; Errors; Lexicographic semi order; Risk; Transitivity; Utility

Indexed keywords

EID: 34547870184     PISSN: 07495978     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.obhdp.2007.02.001     Document Type: Article

References (62)

1. Birnbaum M.H. Violations of monotonicity in judgment and decision making. In: Marley A.A.J. (Ed). Choice, decision, and measurement: Essays in honor of R. Duncan Luce (1997), Erlbaum, Mahwah, NJ 73-100
2. Birnbaum M.H. Testing critical properties of decision making on the Internet. Psychological Science 10 (1999) 399-407
3. Birnbaum M.H. A Web-based program of research on decision making. In: Reips U.-D., and Bosnjak M. (Eds). Dimensions of Internet science (2001), Pabst Science Publishers, Lengerich, Germany 23-55
4. Birnbaum M.H. Causes of Allais common consequence paradoxes: an experimental dissection. Journal of Mathematical Psychology 48 2 (2004) 87-106
5. Birnbaum M.H. Tests of rank-dependent utility and cumulative prospect theory in gambles represented by natural frequencies: effects of format, event framing, and branch splitting. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes 95 (2004) 40-65
6. Birnbaum M.H. A comparison of five models that predict violations of first-order stochastic dominance in risky decision making. Journal of Risk and Uncertainty 31 (2005) 263-287
7. Birnbaum, M.H. (2005b). Testing properties of decision making models with fallible data. Working manuscript, available from M. Birnbaum.
8. Birnbaum M.H. Three new tests of independence that differentiate models of risky decision making. Management Science 51 (2005) 1346-1358
9. Birnbaum M.H. Evidence against prospect theories in gambles with positive, negative, and mixed consequences. Journal of Economic Psychology 27 (2006) 737-761
10. Birnbaum, M.H. (submitted for publication-a). New paradoxes of risky decision making. submitted for publication.
11. Birnbaum, M.H. (submitted for publication-b). Testing lexicographic semi-orders as models of decision making: priority dominance, dimension integration, dimension interaction, and transitivity.
12. Birnbaum M.H., and Navarrete J. Testing descriptive utility theories: Violations of stochastic dominance and cumulative independence. Journal of Risk and Uncertainty 17 (1998) 49-78
13. Birnbaum, M.H., & Schmidt, U. (submitted for publication). Empirical tests of intransitivity predicted by models of risky choice.
14. Bleichrodt, H., & Schmidt, U. (2005). Context- and reference-dependent utility. Working paper, available from U. Schmidt.
15. Bleichrodt H., and Schmidt U. A context-dependent model of the gambling effect. Management Science 48 (2002) 802-812
16. Bordley R.F. An intransitive expectations-based Bayesian variant of prospect theory. Journal of Risk and Uncertainty 5 (1992) 127-144
17. Bordley R., and Hazen G.B. SSB and weighted linear utility as expected utility with suspicion. Management Science 37 (1991) 396-408
18. Brandstätter E., Gigerenzer G., and Hertwig R. The priority heuristic: choices without tradeoffs. Psychological Review 113 (2006) 409-432
19. Budescu D.V., and Weiss W. Reflection of transitive and intransitive preferences: a test of prospect theory. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes 39 (1987) 184-202
20. Busemeyer J.R., and Townsend J.T. Decision Field Theory: a dynamic cognition approach to decision making. Psychological Review 100 (1993) 432-459
21. Carbone E., and Hey J.D. Which error story is best?. Journal of Risk and Uncertainty 20 2 (2000) 161-176
22. Fishburn P.C. Lexicographic orders, utilities, and decision rules: a survey. Management Science 17 (1971) 1442-1471
23. Fishburn P.C. Nontransitive measurable utility. Journal of Mathematical Psychology 26 (1982) 31-67
24. Fishburn P.C. Nontransitive preferences in decision theory. Journal of Risk and Uncertainty 4 (1991) 113-134
25. Fishburn P. Nontransitive preferences and normative decision theory. In: Geweke J. (Ed). Decision making under risk and uncertainty: New models and empirical findings (1992), Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht 3-10
26. González-Vallejo C. Making trade-offs: a probabilistic and context-sensitive model of choice behavior. Psychological Review 109 (2002) 137-155
27. Harless D.W., and Camerer C.F. The predictive utility of generalized expected utility theories. Econometrica 62 (1994) 1251-1290
28. Hausner M. Multidimensional utilities. In: Thrall R.M., Coombs C.H., and Davis R.L. (Eds). Decision processes (1954), Wiley, New York 167-180
29. Hey J.D., and Orme C. Investigating generalizations of expected utility theory using experimental data. Econometrica 62 (1994) 1291-1326
30. Humphrey S.J. Non-transitive choice: event-splitting effects or framing effects?. Economica 68 (2001) 77-96
31. Iverson, G.J., Myung, J.I., & Karabatsos, G. (2006). Intransitivity of preference: Revisited. Working paper, available from Geoffrey J. Iverson, Institute for Mathematical Behavioral Sciences, UCI, Irvine, CA 92697.
32. Iverson G., and Falmagne J.-C. Statistical issues in measurement. Mathematical Social Sciences 10 (1985) 131-153
33. Kahneman D., and Tversky A. Prospect Theory: an analysis of decision under risk. Econometrica 47 (1979) 263-291
34. Leland J.W. Generalized similarity judgments: an alternative explanation for choice anomalies. Journal of Risk and Uncertainty 9 (1994) 151-172
35. Leland J.W. Similarity judgments in choice under uncertainty: a re-interpretation of the predictions of regret theory. Management Science 44 (1998) 659-672
36. Lindman H.R., and Lyons J. Stimulus complexity and choice inconsistency among gambles. Organizational Behavior and Human Performance 21 (1978) 146-159
37. Loomes G., Starmer C., and Sugden R. Preference reversal: information-processing effect or rational non-transitive choice?. Economic Journal 99 (1989) 140-151
38. Loomes G., Starmer C., and Sugden R. Observing violations of transitivity by experimental methods. Econometrica 59 (1991) 425-440
39. Loomes G., and Sugden R. Regret theory: an alternative theory of rational choice under uncertainty. Economic Journal 92 (1982) 805-824
40. Loomes G., and Taylor C. Non-transitive preferences over gains and losses. The Economic Journal 102 (1992) 357-365
41. Luce R.D. Semiorders and a theory of utility discrimination. Econometrica 24 (1956) 178-191
42. Luce R.D. Individual choice behavior (1959), Wiley, New York
43. Luce R.D. Thurstone and sensory scaling: then and now. Psychological Review 101 (1994) 271-277
44. Luce R.D. Utility of gains and losses: Measurement-theoretical and experimental approaches (2000), Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Mahwah, NJ
45. Luce R.D., and von Winterfeldt D. What common ground exists for descriptive, prescriptive, and normative utility theories?. Management Science 40 2 (1994) 263-279
46. Marley A.A.J., and Luce R.D. Independence properties vis-à-vis several utility representations. Theory and Decision 58 (2005) 77-143
47. May K.O. Intransitivity, utility, and the aggregation of preference patterns. Econometrica 22 (1954) 1-13
48. Montgomery H. A study of intransitive preferences using a think aloud procedure. In: Jungerman H., and de Zeeuw G. (Eds). Decision making and change in human affairs (1977), D. Reidel, Dordrecht-Holland 347-362
49. Morrison H.W. Testable conditions for triads of paired comparison choices. Psychometrika 28 (1963) 369-390
50. Myung J.I., Karabatsos G., and Iverson G.J. A Bayesian approach to testing decision making axioms. Journal of Mathematical Psychology 49 (2005) 205-225
51. Regenwetter, M., Stober, C.D., Dana, J., & Kim, A. (2006). Tversky's intransitivity of preference revisited. Paper presented to Society for Mathematical Psychology, Vancouver, July 2006.
52. Rieskamp J., Busemeyer J.R., and Mellers B.A. Extending the bounds of rationality: a review of research on preferential choice. Journal of Economic Literature 35 (2006) 631-661
53. Rosenthal R., and Fode K.L. The problem of experimenter outcome-bias. In: Ray D.P. (Ed). Series research in social psychology (1961), National Institute of Social and Behavioral Science, Washington, DC
54. Sopher B., and Gigliotti G. Intransitive cycles: rational choice or random error? An answer based on estimation of error rates with experimental data. Theory and Decision 35 (1993) 311-336
55. Starmer C. Cycling with rules of thumb: an experimental test for a new form of non-transitive behavior. Theory and Decision 46 (1999) 141-158
56. Starmer C., and Sugden R. Testing alternative explanations of cyclical choices. Economica 65 (1998) 347-361
57. Stevenson M.K., Busemeyer J.R., and Naylor J.C. Judgment and decision-making theory. In: Dunnette M., and Hough L.M. (Eds). New handbook of industrial-organizational psychology (1991), Consulting Psychologist Press, Palo Alto, CA 283-374
58. Thurstone L.L. A law of comparative judgment. Psychological Review 34 (1927) 273-286 (Reprinted 1994, 101, 266-270)
59. Tversky A. Intransitivity of preferences. Psychological Review 76 (1969) 31-48
60. Tversky A., and Kahneman D. Advances in prospect theory: cumulative representation of uncertainty. Journal of Risk and Uncertainty 5 (1992) 297-323
61. Viscusi W.K. Prospective reference theory: toward an explanation of the paradoxes. Journal of Risk and Uncertainty 2 (1989) 235-264
62. Wu G., Zhang J., and Gonzalez R. Decision under risk. In: Koehler D., and Harvey N. (Eds). Blackwell handbook of judgment and decision making (2004), Oxford University Press, Oxford 399-423