Decision by sampling: The role of the decision environment in risky choice

Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology

Volumn 62, Issue 6, 2009, Pages 1041-1062

  Stewart, Neil ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF WARWICK   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

Decision by sampling; Decision under risk; Expected utility; Judgement and decision making; Subjective probability

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; DECISION MAKING; ENVIRONMENT; HIGH RISK BEHAVIOR; HUMAN; PHYSIOLOGY; PROBABILITY; PSYCHOLOGICAL THEORY;

DECISION MAKING; ENVIRONMENT; HUMANS; PROBABILITY; PSYCHOLOGICAL THEORY; RISK-TAKING;

EID: 67651240639     PISSN: 17470218     EISSN: 17470226     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/17470210902747112     Document Type: Article

References (82)

1. Allais, M. (1953). Le comportement de l'homme ratio-nel devant le risque: Critique des postulats et axioms de l'ecole americaine [Rational man's behavior in face of risk: Critique of the American School's postulates and axioms]. Econometrica, 21, 503-546.
2. Anderson, J. R., & Schooler, L. J. (1991). Reflections of the environment in memory. Psychological Science, 2, 396-408.
3. Anderson, N. H. (1981). Foundations of information integration theory. New York: Academic Press.
4. Ariely, D., Koszegi, B., Mazar, N., & Shampan'er, K. (n.d.). Price-sensitive preferences. Unpublished manuscript.
5. Bak, P. (1997). How nature works: The science of self-organized criticality. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
6. Bell, D. E., & Fishburn, P. C. (1999). Utility functions for wealth. Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, 20, 5-44.
7. Benartzi, S., & Thaler, R. H. (2001). Naive diversification strategies in defined contribution saving plans. The American Economic Review, 91, 79-98.
8. Bernoulli, D. (1954). Expositions of a new theory of the measurement of risk. Econometrica, 22, 23-36. (Original work published 1738)
9. Bettman, J. R., Luce, M. F., & Payne, J. W. (1998). Constructive consumer choice processes. Journal of Consumer Research, 25, 187-217.
10. Birnbaum, M. H. (1992). Violations of the monotoni-city and contextual effects in choice-based certainty equivalents. Psychological Science, 3, 310-314.
11. Birnbaum, M. H. (2008). New paradoxes of risky decision making. Psychological Review, 115, 453-501.
12. Birnbaum, M. H., & Chavez, A. (1997). Tests of theories of decision making: Violations of branch independence and distribution independence. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 71, 161-194.
13. Brown, G. D. A., Gardner, J., Oswald, A. J., & Qian, J. (2008). Does wage rank affect employees' well-being? Industrial Relations, 47, 355-389.
14. Budescu, D. V., & Wallsten, T. S. (1995). Processing linguistic probabilities: General principles and empirical evidence. In J. Busemeyer, D. L. Medin, & R. Hastie (Eds.), The psychology of learning and motivation: Vol. 32. Decision making from a cognitive perspective (pp. 275-318). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.
15. 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.
16. Camerer, C. F. (1995). Individual decision making. In J. Kagel & A. E. Roth (Eds.), Handbook of experimental economics (pp. 587-703). Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
17. Carlin, P. S. (1992). Violations of the reduction and independence axioms in Allais-type and common-ratio effect experiments. Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, 19, 213-235.
18. Chater, N., & Brown, G. D. A. (2008). From universal laws of cognition to specific cognitive models. Cognitive Science, 32, 36-47.
19. Daniels, R. L., & Keller, L. R. (1992). Choice-based assessment of utility functions. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 52, 524-543.
20. Davies, G. B., & Satchell, S. E. (2007). The behavioural components of risk aversion. Journal of Mathematical Psychology, 51, 1-13.
21. Dawes, R. M. (1979). The robust beauty of linear models of decision making. American Psychologist, 34, 571-582.
22. Dhar, R., & Glazer, R. (1996). Similarity in context: Cognitive representation and violation of preference and perceptual invariance in consumer choice. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 67, 280-293.
23. Dougherty, M. P. R., & Hunter, J. (2003a). Hypothesis generation, probability judgment, and individual differences in working memory capacity. Acta Psychologica, 113, 263-282.
24. Dougherty, M. P. R., & Hunter, J. (2003b). Probability judgment and subadditivity: The role of working memory capacity and constraining retrieval. Memory & Cognition, 31, 968-982.
25. Edwards, W. (1962). Subjective probabilities inferred from decisions. Psychological Review, 69, 109-135.
26. Engle, R. W., Tuholski, S. W., Laughlin, J. E., & Conway, A. R. A. (1999). Working memory, short term memory, and general fluid intelligence: A latent variable approach. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 128, 309-331.
27. Ert, E., & Erev, I. (2007). Loss aversion in decisions under risk and the value of a symmetric simplification of prospect theory. Unpublished manuscript.
28. Feller, W. (1968). An introduction to probability theory and its applications (Vol. 1). New York: Wiley.
29. Fishburn, P. C., & Kochenberger, G. A. (1979). Two-piece von Neumann - Morgenstern utility functions. Decision Sciences, 10, 503-518.
30. Galanter, E. (1962). The direct measurement of utility and subjective probability. American Journal of Psychology, 75, 208-220.
31. Galanter, E. (1990). Utility functions for nonmonetary events. American Journal of Psychology, 103, 449-470.
32. Garner, W. R. (1954). Context effects and the validity of loudness scales. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 48, 218-224.
33. Gigerenzer, G., & Hoffrage, U. (1995). How to improve Bayesian reasoning without instruction: Frequency formats. Psychological Review, 102, 684-704.
34. Gonzalez, R., & Wu, G. (1999). On the shape of the probability weighting function. Cognitive Psychology, 38, 129-166.
35. Helson, H. (1964). Adaptation-level theory. New York: Harper & Row.
36. Huber, J., Payne, J. W., & Puto, C. (1982). Adding asymmetrically dominated alternatives: Violations of regularity and the similarity hypothesis. Journal of Consumer Research, 9, 90-98.
37. Kahneman, D., & Miller, D. T. (1986). Norm theory: Comparing reality to its alternatives. Psychological Review, 93, 136-153.
38. Kahneman, D., & Tversky, A. (1979). Prospect theory: An analysis of decision under risk. Econometrica, 47, 263-291.
39. Kahneman, D., & Tversky, A. (Eds.). (2000). Choices, values and frames. New York: Cambridge University Press.
40. Kornbrot, D. E., Donnelly, M., & Galanter, E. (1981). Estimates of utility function parameters from signal-detection experiments. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 7, 441-458.
41. Laming, D. R. J. (1997). The measurement of sensation. London: Oxford University Press.
42. Levin, I. R., Johnson, R. D., Russo, C. P., & Delden, P. J. (1985). Framing effects in judgment tasks with varying amounts of information. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 36, 362-377.
43. Loomes, G., & Sugden, R. (1982). Regret theory: An alternative theory of rational choice under uncertainty. Economic Journal, 92, 805-824.
44. Lópes, L. L., & Oden, G. C. (1983). Some thoughts on the psychological concept of risk. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 9, 137-144.
45. Luce, R. D. (2000). Utility of gains and losses: Measurement - theoretical and experimental approaches. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
46. Mellers, B. A., & Chang, S. (1994). Representations of risk judgments. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 57, 167-184.
47. Mellers, B. A., Chang, S. J., Birnbaum, M. H., & Ordóñ ez, L. D. (1992a). Preferences, prices, and ratings in risky decision-making. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 18, 347-361.
48. Mellers, B. A., Ordóñez, L. D., & Birnbaum, M. H. (1992b). A change-of-process theory for contextual effects and preference reversals in risky decision making. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 52, 331-369.
49. Parducci, A. (1965). Category judgment: A range-frequency model. Psychological Review, 72, 407-418.
50. Parducci, A. (1995). Happiness, pleasure and judgment: The contextual theory and its applications. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
51. Payne, J. W., Bettman, J. R., & Johnson, E. J. (1992). Behavioral decision research: A constructive processing perspective. Annual Review of Psychology, 43, 87-131.
52. Poulton, E. C. (1989). Bias in quantifying judgments. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
53. Poulton, E. C. (1994). Behavioural decision theory: A new approach. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
54. Quiggin, J. (1993). Generalized expected utility theory: The rank-dependent model. Norwell, MA: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
55. Savage, L. J. (1954). The foundations of statistics. New York: Wiley.
56. Schoemaker, P. J. H. (1982). The expected utility model: Its variants, purposes, evidence, and limitations. Journal of Economic Literature, 20, 529-563.
57. Sedlmeier, P., & Betsch, T. (Eds.). (2002). Etc. Frequency processing and cognition. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
58. Shanteau, J. (1975). Averaging versus multiplying combination rules of inference judgment. Acta Psychologica, 39, 83-89.
59. Simonson, I. (1989). Choice based on reasons: The case of attraction and compromise effects. Journal of Consumer Research, 16, 158-174.
60. Slovic, P. (1995). The construction of preference. American Psychologist, 50, 364-371.
61. Sprenger, A., & Dougherty, M. R. (2006). Differences between probability and frequency judgments: The role of individual differences in working memory capacity. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 99, 202-211.
62. Starmer, C. (2000). Developments in non-expected utility theory: The hunt for a descriptive theory of choice under risk. Journal of Economic Literature, 38, 332-382.
63. Stewart, N., & Brown, G. D. A. (2004). Sequence effects in categorizing tones varying in frequency. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 30, 416-430.
64. Stewart, N., Brown, G. D. A., & Chater, N. (2002). Sequence effects in categorization of simple perceptual stimuli. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 28, 3-11.
65. Stewart, N., Brown, G. D. A., & Chater, N. (2005). Absolute identification by relative judgment. Psychological Review, 112, 881-911.
66. Stewart, N., Chater, N., & Brown, G. D. A. (2006). Decision by sampling. Cognitive Psychology, 53, 1-26.
67. Stewart, N., Chater, N., Stott, H. P., & Reimers, S. (2003). Prospect relativity: How choice options influence decision under risk. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 132, 23-46.
68. Stewart, N., & Morin, C. (2007). Dissimilarity is used as evidence of category membership in multidimensional perceptual categorisation: A test of the similarity - dissimilarity generalised context model. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 60, 1337-1346.
69. Stewart, N., & Reimers, S. (2008a). How the distribution of attribute values influences decision under risk. Unpublished manuscript.
70. Stewart, N., & Reimers, S. (2008b). Revealed psychoeconomic functions are not stable. Unpublished manuscript.
71. Stewart, N., & Simpson, K. (2008). A decision-by-sampling account of decision under risk. In N. Chater & M. Oaksford (Eds.), The probabilistic mind: Prospects for Bayesian cognitive science (pp. 261-276). Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
72. Stott, H. P. (2006). Cumulative prospect theory's functional menagerie. Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, 32, 101-130.
73. Thomas, R. P., Dougherty, M. R. P., Sprenger, A. M., & Harbison, J. I. (2008). Diagnostic hypothesis generation and human judgment. Psychological Review, 115, 155-185.
74. Tversky, A. (1969). Intransitivity of preferences. Psychological Review, 76, 31-48.
75. Tversky, A., & Kahneman, D. (1992). Advances in prospect theory: Cumulative representation of uncertainty. Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, 5, 297-323.
76. Tversky, A., & Koehler, D. J. (1994). Support theory: A nonextensional representation of subjective probability. Psychological Review, 101, 547-567.
77. Vlaev, I., Chater, N., & Stewart, N. (2007a). Financial prospect relativity: Context effects in financial decision-making under risk. Journal of Behavioral Decision Making, 20, 273-304.
78. Vlaev, I., Chater, N., & Stewart, N. (2007b). Relativistic financial decisions: Context effects on retirement saving and investment risk preferences. Judgment and Decision Making, 2, 292-311.
79. von Neumann, M., & Morgenstern, O. (1947). Theory of games and economic behavior (2nd ed.). Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
80. Wedell, D. H. (1991). Distinguishing among models of contextually induced preference reversals. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 17, 767-778.
81. Windschitl, P. D., & Chambers, J. R. (2004). The dud-alternative effect in likelihood judgment. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 30, 198-215.
82. Windschitl, P. D., & Wells, G. L. (1998). The alternative-outcomes effect. Journal of Personality & Social Psychology, 75, 1441-1423.