Gain-loss separability and coalescing in risky decision making

Management Science

Volumn 53, Issue 6, 2007, Pages 1016-1028

  Birnbaum, Michael H ^a   Bahra, Jeffrey P ^a  

^a CALIFORNIA STATE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

Decision choice; Decision risk; Utility preference

Indexed keywords

DECISION CHOICE; DECISION RISKS; UTILITY PREFERENCE;

BEHAVIORAL RESEARCH; MATHEMATICAL MODELS; PARAMETER ESTIMATION; RISK ANALYSIS;

DECISION MAKING;

EID: 37349074291     PISSN: 00251909     EISSN: 15265501     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1287/mnsc.1060.0592     Document Type: Article

References (37)

1. Abdellaoui, M., H. Bleichrodt, C. Paraschiv. 2005. Measuring loss aversion: A parameter-free approach. Working paper, Erasmus University and GRID, ENSAM-Paris and ESTP, France.
2. Battalio, R., J. H. Kagel, K. Jiranyakul. 1990. Testing between alternative models of choice under uncertainty: Some initial results. J. Risk Uncertainty 3 25-30.
3. Birnbaum, M. H. 1974. The nonadditivity of personality impressions. J. Experiment. Psych. 102 543-561.
4. Birnbaum, M. H. 1997. Violations of monotonicity in judgment and decision making. A. A. J. Marley, ed. Choice, Decision, and Measurement: Essays in Honor of R. Duncan Luce. Erlbaum, Mahwah, NJ, 73-100.
5. Birnbaum, M. H. 1999a. Paradoxes of Allais, stochastic dominance, and decision weights. J. Shanteau, B. A. Mellers, D. A. Schum, eds. Decision Science and Technology: Reflections on the Contributions of Ward Edwards. Kluwer Academic Publishers, Norwell, MA, 27-52.
6. Birnbaum, M. H. 1999b. Testing critical properties of decision making on the Internet. Psych. Sci. 10 399-407.
7. Birnbaum, M. H. 2004a. Causes of Allais common consequence paradoxes: An experimental dissection. J. Math. Psych. 48(2) 87-106.
8. Birnbaum, M. H. 2004b. Tests of rank-dependent utility and cumulative prospect theory in gambles represented by natural frequencies: Effects of format, event framing, and branch splitting. Organ. Behav. Human Decision Processes 95 40-65.
9. Birnbaum, M. H. 2005. Three new tests of independence that differentiate models of risky decision making. Management Sci. 51 1346-1358.
10. Birnbaum, M. H., A. Chavez. 1997. Tests of theories of decision making: Violations of branch independence and distribution independence. Organ. Behav. Human Decision Processes 71(2) 161-194.
11. Birnbaum, M. H., J. B. Navarrete. 1998. Testing descriptive utility theories: Violations of stochastic dominance and cumulative independence. J. Risk Uncertainty 17 49-78.
12. Birnbaum, M. H., S. E. Stegner. 1979. Source credibility in social judgment: Bias, expertise, and the judge's point of view. J. Personality Soc. Psych. 37 48-74.
13. Brooks, P., H. Zank. 2005. Loss averse behavior. J. Risk Uncertainty 31 301-325.
14. Carbone, E., J. D. Hey. 2000. Which error story is best? J. Risk Uncertainty 20 161-176.
15. Edwards, W. 1962. Subjective probabilities inferred from decisions. Psych. Rev. 69 109-135.
16. Fennema, H., M. van Assen. 1998. Measuring the utility of losses by means of the tradeoff method. J. Risk Uncertainty 17 277-295.
17. Harless, D., C. Camerer. 1994. The predictive utility of generalized expected utility theories. Econometrica 62 1251-1289.
18. Humphrey, S. J. 1995. Regret aversion or event-splitting effects? More evidence under risk and uncertainty. J. Risk Uncertainty 11 263-274.
19. Kahneman, D., A. Tversky. 1979. Prospect theory: An analysis of decision under risk. Econometrica 47 263-291.
20. Köbberling, V., P. P. Wakker. 2005. An index of loss aversion. J. Econom. Theory 122 119-131.
21. Levy, H., M. Levy. 2002. Prospect theory, much ado about nothing? Management Sci. 48 1334-1349.
22. Luce, R. D. 2000. Utility of Cains and Losses: Measurement-Theoretical and Experimental Approaches. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Mahwah, NJ.
23. Luce, R. D., P. C. Fishburn. 1991. Rank and sign-dependent linear utility models for finite first order gambles. J. Risk Uncertainty 4 29-59.
24. Luce, R. D., P. C. Fishburn. 1995. A note on deriving rank-dependent utility using additive joint receipts. J. Risk Uncertainty 11 5-16.
25. Luce, R. D., A. A. J. Marley. 2005. Ranked additive utility representations of gambles: Old and new axiomatizations. J. Risk Uncertainty 30 21-62.
26. Marley, A. A. J., R. D. Luce. 2005. Independence properties vis-à-vis several utility representations. Theory Decision 58 77-143.
27. Meginniss, J. R. 1976. A new class of symmetric utility rules for gambles, subjective marginal probability functions, and a generalized Bayes' rule. Proc. Amer. Statist. Assoc., Bus. Econom. Statist. Sec. 471-476.
28. Quiggin, J. 1982. A theory of anticipated utility. J. Econom. Behav. Organ. 3 324-345.
29. Quiggin, J. 1993. Generalized Expected Utility Theory: The RankDependent Model. Kluwer, Boston, MA.
30. Schmidt, U., S. Traub. 2002. An experimental test of loss aversion. J. Risk Uncertainly 25 233-249.
31. Schmidt, U., H. Zank. 2005. What is loss aversion? J. Risk Uncertainly 30 157-167.
32. Sopher, B., G. Gigliotti. 1993. Intransitive cycles: Rational choice or random error? An answer based on estimation of error rates with experimental data. Theory Decision 35 311-336.
33. Starmer, C. 2000. Developments in non-expected utility theory: The hunt for a descriptive theory of choice under risk. J. Econom. Literature 38 332-382.
34. Starmer, C., R. Sugden. 1993. Testing for juxtaposition and eventsplitting effects. J. Risk Uncertainty 6 235-254.
35. Tversky, A., D. Kahneman. 1992. Advances in prospect theory: Cumulative representation of uncertainty. J. Risk Uncertainly 5 297-323.
36. Wakker, P. P. 2003. The data of Levy and Levy (2002), "Prospect theory: Much ado about nothing?" Actually support prospect theory. Management Sci. 49 979-981.
37. Wu, G., A. B. Markle. 2004. An empirical test of gain-loss separability in prospect theory. Working Paper 06-25-04, Graduate School of Business, University of Chicago, Chicago, IL, http://gsbwww.uchicago.edu/fac/george.wu/ research/abstracts.html.