Probability weighting and the 'level' and 'spacing' of outcomes: An experimental study over losses

Journal of Risk and Uncertainty

Volumn 39, Issue 1, 2009, Pages 45-63

  Etchart Vincent, Nathalie ^a  

^a Centre International de Recherche sur lEnvironnement et le Developpement   (France)

Author keywords

Individual decision making under risk; Losses; Probability weighting; Prospect theory

Indexed keywords

EID: 71449110539     PISSN: 08955646     EISSN: 15730476     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/s11166-009-9066-0     Document Type: Article

References (72)

1. Abdellaoui, M. (2000). Parameter-free elicitation of utility and probability weighting functions. Management Science, 46(11), 1497-1512.
2. Abdellaoui, M., Vossmann, F., & Weber, M. (2005). Choice-based elicitation and decomposition of decision weights for gains and losses under uncertainty. Management Science, 51(9), 1384-1399.
3. Abdellaoui, M., Barrios, C., & Wakker, P. P. (2007). Reconciling introspective utility with revealed preferences: Experimental arguments based on prospect theory. Journal of Econometrics, 138, 356-378.
4. Abdellaoui, M., Bleichrodt, H., & L'Haridon, O. (2008). A tractable method to measure utility and loss aversion under prospect theory. Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, 36, 245-266.
5. Abdellaoui, M., Attema, A., & Bleichrodt, H. (2009). Intertemporal tradeoffs for gains and losses: An experimental measurement of discounted utility. Economic Journal, forthcoming.
6. Alarié, Y., & Dionne, G. (2001). Lottery decisions and probability weighting function. Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, 22, 21-33.
7. Allais, M. (1988). The general theory of random choices in relation to the invariant cardinal utility function and the specific probability function: The (U, Θ) model, a general overview. In B. Munier (Ed.), Risk, decision and rationality, pp. 231-289. Dordrecht: D. Reidel.
8. Beattie, J., & Loomes, G. (1997). The impact of incentives upon risky choice experiments. Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, 14, 155-168.
9. Bleichrodt, H., & Pinto, J. L. (2000). A parameter-free elicitation of the probability weighting function in medical decision analysis. Management Science, 46(11), 1485-1496.
10. Bonner, S. E., Hastie, R., Sprinkle, G. B., & Young, S. M. (2000). A review of the effects of financial incentives on performance in laboratory tasks: Implications for management accounting. Journal of Management Accounting Research, 13, 19-64.
11. Bonner, S. E., & Sprinkle, G. B. (2002). The effects of monetary incentives on effort and task performance: Theories, evidence, and a framework for research. Accounting, Organizations and Society, 27, 303-345.
12. Bostic, R., Herrnstein, R. J., & Luce, R. D. (1990). The effect on the preference reversal phenomenon of using choice indifferences. Journal of Economic Behavior and Organization, 13, 193-212.
13. Boylan, S. J., & Sprinkle, G. B. (2001). Experimental evidence on the relation between tax rates and compliance: The effect of earned vs. endowed income. Journal of the American Taxation Association, 23, 75-90.
14. Brandstätter, E., Kühberger, A., & Schneider, F. (2002). A cognitive-emotional account of the shape of the probability weighting function. Journal of Behavioral Decision Making, 15(2), 79-100.
15. Camerer, C. F. (1992). Recent tests of generalizations of expected utility theory. In W. Edwards (Ed.), Utility theories: Measurements and applications, pp. 207-251. Boston: Kluwer.
16. Camerer, C. F., & Hogarth, R. M. (1999). The effects of financial incentives in experiments: A review and capital-labor-production framework. Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, 19, 7-42.
17. Cohen, M. (1994). Risk aversion concepts in expected- and non-expected utility models. The Geneva Papers on Risk and Insurance Theory, 42, 370-380.
18. Cohen, M., Jaffray, J.-Y., & Saïd, T. (1987). Experimental comparison of individual behavior under risk and under uncertainty. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 39, 1-22.
19. Cummins, J. D., & Tennyson, S. (1996). Moral hazard in insurance claiming: Evidence from automobile insurance. Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, 12, 29-50.
20. Currim, I. S., & Sarin, R. K. (1989). Prospect versus utility. Management Science, 35(1), 22-41.
21. Diecidue, E., & Wakker, P. P. (2001). On the intuition of rank-dependent utility. Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, 23, 281-298.
22. Diecidue, E., Schmidt, U., & Zank, H. (2009). "Parametric weighting functions." Journal of Economic Theory, forthcoming.
23. Etchart-Vincent, N. (2004). Is probability weighting sensitive to the magnitude of consequences? An experimental investigation on losses. Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, 28(3), 217-235.
24. Etchart-Vincent, N. (2009). The shape of the utility function under risk in the loss domain and the 'ruin point': Some experimental results, submitted.
25. Etchart-Vincent, N., & L' Haridon, O. (2008). Monetary incentives in the loss domain and behaviour toward risk: An experimental comparison of three rewarding schemes including real losses. submitted.
26. Fehr, H., Epper, T., Bruhin, A., & Schubert, R. (2007). "Risk and rationality: The effect of incidental mood on probability weighting", WP no 0703, University of Zurich (Switzerland).
27. Fehr-Duda, H., de Gennaro, M., & Schubert, R. (2006). Gender, financial risks, and probability weights. Theory and Decision, 60, 283-313.
28. Fennema, H., & van Assen, M. A. L. M. (1999). Measuring the utility of losses by means of the tradeoff method. Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, 17, 277-295.
29. Goldstein, W. M., & Einhorn, H. J. (1987). Expression theory and the preference reversal phenomenon. Psychological Review, 94, 236-254.
30. Gonzalez, R., & Wu, G. (1999). On the shape of the probability weighting function. Cognitive Psychology, 38, 129-166.
31. Green, J. R., & Jullien, B. (1988). Ordinal independence in non-linear utility theory. Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, 14, 355-388.
32. Harbaugh, W. T., Krause, K., & Vesterlund, L. (2002). Risk attitudes of children and adults: choices over small and large probability gains and losses. Experimental Economics, 5, 53-84.
33. Harless, D. W., & Camerer, C. F. (1994). The predictive utility of generalized expected utility theories. Econometrica, 62(6), 1251-1289.
34. Hertwig, R., & Ortmann, A. (2001). Experimental practices in economics: A methodological challenge for psychologists? Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 24, 383-451.
35. Higgins, E. T. (1997). Beyond pleasure and pain. American Psychologist, 52(12), 1280-1300.
36. Higgins, E. T. (1998). Promotion and Prevention: Regulatory Focus as a Motivational Principle. In M. P. Zanna (ed.), Advances in Experimental Social Psychology 30, 1-46.
37. Higgins, E. T. (2000). Making a good decision: Value from fit. American Psychologist, 55(11), 1217-1230.
38. Humphrey, S. J., & Verschoor, A. (2004). The probability weighting function: Experimental evidence from Uganda, India and Ethiopia. Economics Letters, 84, 419-425.
39. Irwin, F. W. (1953). Stated expectations as functions of probability and desirability of outcomes. Journal of Personality, 21, 329-335.
40. Kahneman, D., & Tversky, A. (1984). Choices, values, and frames. American Psychologist, 39, 341-350.
41. Keasy, K., & Moon, P. (1996). Gambling with the house money in capital expenditure decisions: An experimental analysis. Economics Letters, 50, 105-110.
42. Kluger, A. N., Stephan, E., Ganzach, Y., & Hershkovitz, M. (2004). The effect of regulatory focus on the shape of probability-weighting function: Evidence from a cross-modality matching method. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 95, 20-39.
43. Kunreuther, H., Novemsky, N., & Kahneman, D. (2001). Making low probabilities useful. Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, 23, 103-120.
44. Lattimore, P. K., Baker, J. R., & Witte, A. D. (1992). The influence of probability on risky choice: a parametric examination. Journal of Economic Behavior and Organization, 17, 377-400.
45. McFadden, D. L. (1999). Rationality for economists? Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, 19, 73-105.
46. Mason, C. F., Shogren, J. F., Settle, C., & List, J. A. (2005). Investigating risky choices over losses using experimental data. Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, 31(2), 187-215.
47. Neilson, W. S. (2003). Probability transformations in the study of behavior toward risk. Synthese, 135, 171-192.
48. Prelec, D. (1998). The probability weighting function. Econometrica, 66(3), 497-527.
49. Quiggin, J. (1982). A theory of anticipated utility. Journal of Economic Behavior and Organization, 3, 323-343.
50. Quiggin, J. (1989). Sure-things-dominance and independence rules for choice under uncertainty. Annals of Operations Research, 19, 335-357.
51. Quiggin, J. (1993). Generalized expected utility theory: The rank-dependent model. Boston/Dordrecht/London: Kluwer.
52. Rosett, R. N. (1971). Weak experimental verification of the expected utility hypothesis. Review of Economic Studies, 38, 481-492.
53. Rottenstreich, Y., & Hsee, C. K. (2001). Money, kisses, and electric shocks: On the affective psychology of risk. Psychology Science, 12(3), 185-190.
54. Saha, A. (1993). Expo-power utility: A flexible form for absolute and relative aversion. American Journal of Agricultural Economics, 75, 905-913.
55. Segal, U. (1989). Anticipated utility: A measure representation approach. Annals of Operations Research, 19, 359-373.
56. Segal, U. (1993). The measure representation: A correction. Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, 6, 99-107.
57. Slovic, P. (1966). Value as a Determiner of Subjective Probability. IEEE Transactions on Human Factors in Electronics, HFE, 7(1), 22-28.
58. Sonsino, D. (2008). Disappointment aversion in internet bidding-decisions. Theory and Decision, 64, 363-393.
59. 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.
60. Sunstein, C. R. (2003). Terrorism and probability neglect. Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, 26(2/3), 121-136.
61. Thaler, R. H., & Johnson, E. J. (1990). Gambling with the house money and trying to break even: The effects of prior outcomes on risky choices. Management Science, 36(6), 643-660.
62. Tversky, A., & Kahneman, D. (1992). Advances in prospect theory: Cumulative representation of uncertainty. Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, 5, 297-323.
63. Tversky, A., & Fox, C. R. (1995). Weighing risk and uncertainty. Psychological Review, 102, 269-283.
64. Tversky, A., & Wakker, P. P. (1995). Risk attitudes and decision weights. Econometrica, 63, 1255-1280.
65. Tversky, A., Sattah, S., & Slovic, P. (1988). Contingent weighting in judgment in choice. Psychological Review, 95(3), 371-384.
66. Viscusi, W. K. (1989). Prospective reference theory: Toward an explanation of the paradoxes. Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, 2(3), 235-264.
67. Viscusi, W. K. (1995). Government action, biases in risk perception, and insurance decisions. Geneva Papers on Risk and Insurance Theory, 20, 93-110.
68. Wakker, P. P. (1994). Separating marginal utility and probabilistic risk aversion. Theory and Decision, 36, 1-44.
69. Wakker, P. P. (2004). On the composition of risk preference and belief. Psychological Review, 111, 236-241.
70. Wakker, P. P., & Deneffe, D. (1996). Eliciting von Neumann-Morgenstern utilities when probabilities are distorted or unknown. Management Science, 42(8), 1131-1150.
71. Weber, B. J., & Chapman, G. B. (2005). Playing for peanuts: Why is risk seeking more common for low-stakes gambles? Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 97, 31-46.
72. Weber, M., & Zuchel, H. (2005). How do prior outcomes affect risk attitude? Comparing escalation of commitment and the house-money effect. Decision Analysis, 2(1), 30-43.