On the descriptive value of loss aversion in decisions under risk: Six clarifications

Judgment and Decision Making

Volumn 8, Issue 3, 2013, Pages 214-235

  Ert, Eyal ^a   Erev, Ido ^b  

^a HEBREW UNIVERSITY OF JERUSALEM   (Israel)

^b TECHNION ISRAEL INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY   (Israel)

Author keywords

Choice lists; Contrast effect; Equity premium puzzle; Prospect theory; Status quo bias

Indexed keywords

EID: 84878428010     PISSN: 19302975     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: None     Document Type: Article

References (82)

1. Abdellaoui, M., Bleichrodt, H., & Paraschiv, C. (2007). Loss aversion under Prospect theory: A parameter free measurement. Management Science, 53, 1659-1674.
2. Abdellaoui, M., Bleichrodt, H., & Haridon, O. L. (2008). A tractable method to measure utility and loss aversion under prospect theory. Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, 36, 245-266.
3. Aiyagari, S. R., & Gertler, M. (1991). Asset returns with transactions costs and uninsured individual risk. Journal of Monetary Economics, 27, 311-331.
4. Akerlof, G. A. (1970). The market for "lemons": Quality uncertainty and the market mechanism. The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 84, 488-500.
5. Andersen, S., Harrison, G.W., Lau, M. I., & Rutström, E. E. (2010). Behavioral econometrics for psychologists. Journal of Economic Psychology, 31, 553-576.
6. Anderson, C. J. (2003). The psychology of doing nothing: Forms of decision avoidance result from reason and emotion. Psychological Bulletin, 129, 139-167.
7. Barber, B. M., & Odean, T. (2000). Trading is hazardous to your wealth: The common stock investment performance of individual investors. The Journal of Finance, 55, 773-806.
8. Baron, J., & Ritov, I. (1994). Reference points and omission bias. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 59, 475-498.
9. Barron, G., & Erev, I. (2003). Small feedbackbased decisions and their limited correspondence to description-based decisions. Journal of Behavioral Decision Making, 16, 215-233.
10. Battalio, R., Kagel, J., & Jiranyakul, K. (1990). Testing between alternative models of choice under uncertainty: Some initial results. Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, 3, 25-50.
11. Benartzi, S., & Thaler, R. H. (1995). Myopic loss aversion and the equity premium puzzle. The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 110, 73-92.
12. Ben Zion, U., Erev, I., Haruvy, E., & Shavit, T. (2010). Adaptive behavior leads to under-diversification. Journal of Economic Psychology, 31, 985-995.
13. Booij, A. S., & van de Kuilen, G. (2009). A parameterfree analysis of the utility of money for the general population under prospect theory. Journal of Economic Psychology, 30, 651-666.
14. Booij, A. S., van Praag, B. & van de Kuilen, G. (2010). A parametric analysis of prospect theory's functionals for the general population. Theory and Decision, 68, 115-148.
15. Brenner, L., Rottenstreich, Y., Sood S., & Bilgin, B. (2007). On the psychology of loss aversion: Possession, valence, and reversals of the endowment effect. Journal of Consumer Research, 34, 369-376.
16. Brooks, P., & Zank, H. (2005). Loss averse behavior. Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, 31, 301-325.
17. Camerer, C. (2000). Prospect theory in the wild: Evidence from the field. In C. Camerer, G. Loewenstein, & M. Rabin (Eds), Advances in behavioral economics, pp. 148-161. New York: Princeton University Press.
18. Constantinides, G. M. (1990). Habit formation: A resolution of the equity premium puzzle. The Journal of Political Economy, 98, 519-543.
19. Constantinides, G. M., Donaldson, J. B., & Mehra, R. (2010). Junior can't borrow: A new perspective on the equity premium puzzle. Quarterly Journal of Economics, 117, 269-296.
20. Coombs, C. H., & Pruitt, D. G. (1960). Components of risk in decision making: Probability and variance preferences. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 60, 265.
21. Dawes, R. M., & Corrigan, B. (1974). Linear models in decision making. Psychological Bulletin, 81, 95-106.
22. Dehaene, S. (2007). Symbols and quantities in parietal cortex: Elements of a mathematical theory of number representation and manipulation. In P. Haggard, Y. Rosseti, & M. Kawato (Eds.), Attention & performance XXII. Sensori-motor foundations of higher cognition, pp. 527-574. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
23. Dupont, D. Y., & Lee, G. S. (2002). The endowment effect, status-quo bias and loss aversion: Rational alternative explanation. Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, 25, 87-101.
24. Erev, I., Ert, E., Roth, A., Haruvy, E., Herzog, S., Hau, R., Hertwig, R., Stewart, T., West, R., & Lebiere, C. (2010). A choice prediction competition for choices from experience and from description. Journal of Behavioral Decision Making, 23, 15-47.
25. Erev, I., Ert, E., & Roth, A. E. (2010). A choice prediction competition for market entry games: An introduction. Games, 1, 117-136.
26. Erev, I., Ert, E., & Yechiam, E. (2008). Loss aversion, diminishing sensitivity, and the effect of experience on repeated decisions. Journal of Behavioral Decision Making, 21, 575-597.
27. Ert, E., & Erev, I. (2008). The rejection of attractive gambles, loss aversion, and the lemon avoidance heuristic. Journal of Economic Psychology, 29, 715-723.
28. Fehr, E., & Goette, L. (2007). Do workers work more if wages are high? Evidence from a randomized field experiment. The American Economic Review, 97, 298-317.
29. Freeman, P. R. (1983). The secretary problem and its extensions: A review. International Statistical Review, 51, 189-206.
30. Gaechter, S., Johnson, E., & Herrmann, A. (2010). Individual-level loss aversion in riskless and risky choices. http://econpapers.repec.org/paper/cdxdpaper/2010-20.htm
31. Gal, D. (2006). A psychological law of inertia and the illusion of loss aversion. Judgment and Decision Making, 1, 23-32.
32. Gigerenzer, G., & Selten, R. (2001). Bounded rationality: The adaptive toolbox. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
33. Gilboa, I., & Schmeidler, D. (1995). Case-based decision theory. The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 110, 605-639.
34. Glöckner, A., & Pachur, T. (2012). Cognitive models of risky choice: Parameter stability and predictive accuracy of prospect theory. Cognition, 123, 21-32.
35. Harrison, G. W., & Rutström, E. E. (2009). Expected utility theory and prospect theory: One wedding and a decent funeral. Experimental Economics, 12,133-158.
36. Harinck, F., Van Dijk, E., Van Beest, I., & Mersmann, P. (2007). When gains loom larger than losses: Reversed loss aversion for small amounts of money. Psychological Science, 18, 1099-1105.
37. Holt, C. A., & Laury, S. K. (2002). Risk aversion and incentive effects. The American Economic Review, 92, 1644-1655.
38. Kagel, J. H., & Levin, D. (in press). Auctions: A survey of experimental research, 1995-2008. In Roth, A. & Kagel, J. eds. The Handbook of Experimental Economics (Vol. 2).
39. Kahneman, D., & Tversky, A. (1979). Prospect Theory: An analysis of decision under risk. Econometrica, 47, 263-291.
40. Knetsch, J. L., & Sinden, J. A. (1984). Willingness to pay and compensation demanded: Experimental evidence of an unexpected disparity in measures of value. The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 99, 507-521.
41. Köbberling, V., & Wakker, P. P. (2005). An index of loss aversion. Journal of Economic Theory, 122, 119-131.
42. McGraw, A. P., Larsen, J. T., Kahneman, D., & Schkade, D. (2010). Comparing gains and losses. Psychological science, 21, 1438-1445.
43. McKenzie, C. R. M., Liersch, M. J., & Finkelstein, S. R. (2006). Recommendations implicit in policy defaults. Psychological Science, 17, 414-420.
44. Morewedge, C. K., Shu, L. L., Gilbert, D. T., & Wilson, T. D. (2009). Bad riddance or good rubbish? Ownership and not loss aversion causes the endowment effect. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 45, 947-951.
45. Novemsky, N., & Kahneman, D. (2005). The boundaries of loss aversion. Journal of Marketing Research, 42, 119-128.
46. Odean, T. (1999). Do investors trade too much? American Economic Review, 89, 1279-1298.
47. Pandelaere, M., Briers, B., & Lembregts, C. (2011). How to make a 29% increase look bigger: The unit effect in option comparisons. Journal of Consumer Research, 38, 308-322.
48. Payne, J. W. (2005). It is whether you win or lose: The importance of the overall probabilities of winning or losing in risky choice. Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, 30, 5-19.
49. Payne, J.W., Bettman, J. R., & Johnson, E. J. (1993). The adaptive decision maker. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.
50. Plott, C. R., & Zeiler, K. (2005). The willingness to pay-willingness to accept gap, the "endowment effect, " subject misconceptions, and experimental procedures for eliciting valuations. The American Economic Review, 95, 530-545.
51. Polkovnichenko, V. (2005). Household portfolio diversification: A case for rank-dependent preferences. Review of Financial Studies, 18, 1467-1502.
52. Rabin, M. (2003). Risk aversion and expected-utility theory: A calibration theorem. Econometrica, 68, 1281-1292.
53. Raghubir, P. & Srivastava, J. (2002). Effect of face value on product valuation in foreign currencies. Journal of Consumer Research, 29, 335-347.
54. Redelmeier, D. A., & Tversky, A. (1992). On the framing of multiple prospects. Psychological Science, 3, 191-193.
55. Rieskamp, J. (2008). The probabilistic nature of preferential choice. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 34, 1446-1465.
56. Rietz, T. A. (1988). The equity risk premium a solution. Journal of Monetary Economics, 22, 117-131.
57. Ritov, I., & Baron, J. (1992). Status-quo and omission biases. Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, 5, 49-61.
58. Rottenstreich, Y., Burson, K., & Faro, D. (2013). Multiple unit holdings yield attenuated endowment effect. Management Science, 59, 545-555.
59. Samuelson, P. A. (1963). Risk and uncertainty: A fallacy of large numbers. Scientia, 98, 108-113.
60. Samuelson, W., & Zeckhauser, R. (1988). Status quo bias in decision making. Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, 1, 7-59.
61. Schmidt, U., S. Traub. (2002). An experimental test of loss aversion. Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, 25, 233-249.
62. Schmidt, U., & Zank, H. (2005). What is loss aversion? Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, 30, 157-167.
63. Sherif, M., Taub, D., & Hovland, C. I. (1958). Assimilation and contrast effects of anchoring stimuli on judgments. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 55, 150-155.
64. Sherif, M., & Hovland, C. I. (1961). Social judgment. New Haven: Yale University Press.
65. Skinner, B.F. (1953). Science and Human Behavior. New York: Free Press.
66. Sonsino, D., Erev, I., & Gilat, S. (2002). On rationality, learning and zero-sum betting-an experimental study of the no-betting conjecture. Mimeo, Technion University.
67. Stewart, N., Chater, N., Stott, H. P., & Reimers, S. (2003). Prospect relativity: How choice options influence decisions under risk. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 132, 23-46.
68. Schwarz, N. (1999). Self-reports: How the questions shape the answers. American Psychologist, 54, 93-105.
69. Slovic, P., Finucane, M. L., Peters, E., & MacGregor, D. G. (2002). The affect heuristic. In T. Gilovich, D. Griffin, & D. Kahneman, Eds., Heuristics and biases: The psychology of intuitive judgment, pp. 397-420. New York: Cambridge University Press.
70. Thaler, R. (1980). Toward a positive theory of consumer choice. Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, 1, 39-60.
71. Thaler, R. H., & Johnson, E. J. (1990). Gambling with the house money and trying to break even: The effects of prior outcomes on risky choice. Management Science, 36, 643-660.
72. Thaler, R. H., Tversky, A., Kahneman, D., & Schwartz, A. (1997). The effect of myopia and loss aversion on risk taking: An experimental test. Quarterly Journal of Economics, 112, 647-661.
73. Tversky, A., & Kahneman, D. (1992). Advances in prospect theory: Cumulative representation of uncertainty. Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, 5, 297-323.
74. Wakker, P. P. (2010). Prospect theory: For risk and ambiguity. Cambridge University Press.
75. Wakker, P. P. (2013). Annotated references on decisions and uncertainty. Websource downloaded on March 27, 2013, from http://people.few.eur.nl/wakker/
76. Weber, R. A. (2003). 'Learning' with no feedback in a competitive guessing game. Games and Economic Behavior, 44, 134-144.
77. Weber, B. J. & Chapman, G. B. (2005). Playing for peanuts: why is risk seeking more common for lowstakes gambles? Organizational Behavior & Human Decision Processes, 97, 31-46.
78. Wu, G., & Markle, A. B. (2008). An empirical test of gain-loss separability in prospect theory. Management Science, 54, 1322-1335.
79. Yechiam, E., & Ert, E. (2011). Risk attitude in decision making: In search of trait-like constructs. Topics in Cognitive Science, 3, 166-186.
80. Yechiam, E., & Hochman, G. (2013). Loss-aversion or loss-attention: The impact of losses on cognitive performance. Cognitive Psychology, 66, 212-231.
81. Yechiam, E., Telpaz, A., & Hochman, G. (2013). The complaint bias in subjective evaluations of incentives. Manuscript, Technion University.
82. Zank, H. (2008). On probabilities and loss aversion. Theory and Decision, 68, 243-261.