New tests of cumulative prospect theory and the priority heuristic: Probability-outcome tradeoff with branch splitting

Judgment and Decision Making

Volumn 3, Issue 4, 2008, Pages 304-316

  Birnbaum, Michael H ^a  

^a CALIFORNIA STATE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

Choice; Cumulative prospect theory; Decision making; Lexicographic semiorder; Priority heuristic; Prospect theory; Utility

Indexed keywords

EID: 70350157269     PISSN: None     EISSN: 19302975     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: None     Document Type: Article

References (28)

1. Birnbaum, M. H. (1982). Controversies in psychological measurement. In B. Wegener (Eds.), Social attitudes and psychophysical measurement, pp. 401-485). Hillsdale, N. J.: Erlbaum.
2. Birnbaum, M. H. (1997). Violations of monotonicity in judgment and decision making. In A. A. J. Marley (Eds.), Choice, decision, and measurement: Essays in honor of R. Duncan Luce, pp. 73-100. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
3. Birnbaum, M. H. (1999). Testing critical properties of decision making on the Internet. Psychological Science, 10, 399-407.
4. Birnbaum, M. H. (2004a). Causes of Allais common consequence paradoxes: An experimental dissection. Journal of Mathematical Psychology, 48, 87-106.
5. 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. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 95, 40-65.
6. Birnbaum, M. H. (2007). Tests of branch splitting and branch-splitting independence in Allais paradoxes with positive and mixed consequences. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 102, 154-173.
7. Birnbaum, M. H. (2008a). Evaluation of the priority heuristic as a descriptive model of risky decision making: Comment on Brandstätter, Gigerenzer, and Hertwig (2006). Psychological Review, 115, 253-260.
8. Birnbaum, M. H. (2008b). New paradoxes of risky decision making. Psychological Review, 115, 463-501.
9. Birnbaum, M. H. (2008c). Postscript: Rejoinder to Brandstätter et al. (2008). Psychological Review, 115, 260-262.
10. Birnbaum, M. H. (submitted). Testing lexicographic semi-orders as models of decision making: Priority dominance, integration, interaction, and transitivity. Submitted for publication.
11. 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.
12. Birnbaum, M. H., & Gutierrez, R. J. (2007). Testing for intransitivity of preferences predicted by a lexicographic semiorder. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 104, 97-112.
13. Birnbaum, M. H., & LaCroix, A. R. (2008). Dimension integration: Testing models without trade-offs. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 105, 122-133.
14. Birnbaum, M. H., & Navarrete, J. B. (1998). Testing descriptive utility theories: Violations of stochastic dominance and cumulative independence. Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, 17, 49-78.
15. Brandstätter, E., Gigerenzer, G., & Hertwig, R. (2006). The priority heuristic: Choices without tradeoffs. Psychological Review, 113, 409-432.
16. Brandstätter, E., Gigerenzer, G., & Hertwig, R. (2008a). Risky Choice with Heuristics: Reply to Birnbaum (2008), Johnson, Schulte-Mecklenbeck, & Willemsen (2008) and Rieger & Wang (2008). Psychological Review, 115, 281-289.
17. Brandstätter, E., Gigerenzer, G., & Hertwig, R. (2008b). Postscript: Rejoinder to Johnson et al. (2008) and Birnbaum (2008). Psychological Review, 115, 289-290.
18. Kahneman, D., & Tversky, A. (1979). Prospect theory: An analysis of decision under risk. Econometrica, 47, 263-291.
19. Leland, J. W. (1994). Generalized similarity judgments: An alternative explanation for choice anomalies. Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, 9, 151-172.
20. Leland, J. W. (1998). Similarity judgments in choice under uncertainty: A re-interpretation of the predictions of regret theory. Management Science, 44, 659-672.
21. Luce, R. D. (2000). Utility of gains and losses: Measurement-theoretical and experimental approaches. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
22. Luce, R. D., & Fishburn, P. C. (1991). Rank- and signdependent linear utility models for finite first order gambles. Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, 4, 29-59.
23. Luce, R. D., & Fishburn, P. C. (1995). A note on deriving rank-dependent utility using additive joint receipts. Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, 11, 5-16.
24. Marley, A. A. J., & Luce, R. D. (2005). Independence properties vis-à-vis several utility representations. Theory and Decision, 58, 77-143.
25. Mellers, B. A., Ordóñez, 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.
26. Quiggin, J. (1993). Generalized expected utility theory: The rank-dependent model. Boston: Kluwer.
27. Rubinstein, A. (1988). Similarity and decision-making under risk (Is there a utility theory resolution to the Allais paradox?). Journal of Economic Theory, 46, 145- 153.
28. Tversky, A., & Kahneman, D. (1992). Advances in prospect theory: Cumulative representation of uncertainty. Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, 5, 297-323.