Not logged in.
Quick Search - Contribution
Contribution Details
| Type | Journal Article |
| Scope | Discipline-based scholarship |
| Title | A test of prospect theory and fuzzy-trace theory in risky choice framing |
| Organization Unit | |
| Authors |
|
| Item Subtype | Original Work |
| Refereed | Yes |
| Status | Published in final form |
| Language |
|
| Journal Title | Journal of Behavioral Decision Making |
| Publisher | Wiley InterScience |
| Geographical Reach | international |
| ISSN | 0894-3257 (P) 1099-0771 (E) |
| Volume | 23 |
| Number | 3 |
| Page Range | 314 - 329 |
| Date | 2010 |
| Abstract Text | Framing effects are said to indicate irrationality in decision making because they illustrate that linguistically different descriptions of equivalent options lead to inconsistent choices. A review of the literature on the effects of adding, or subtracting, implicated complements of the sure option shows that this leads to a classic framing effect, a reversal of the classic effect, or no framing effect. Thus, the assumption of equivalence of formulations is not justified. In addition we provide a test of two major, but opposing theories on framing, prospect theory and fuzzy-trace theory. Based on an online study we investigated the effects of subtracting complements of the risky option. The results are more consistent with fuzzy-trace theory than with prospect theory. The consequences of these findings for the application of formal models like prospect theory, and for rationality, are discussed. |
| Digital Object Identifier | 10.1002/bdm.656 |
| Export |
BibTeX
EP3 XML (ZORA)
|