Why are lotteries valued less? Multiple tests of a direct risk-aversion mechanism

被引:1
作者
Newman, George E. [1 ]
Mochon, Daniel [2 ]
机构
[1] Yale Univ, Sch Management, New Haven, CT 06511 USA
[2] Tulane Univ, Freeman Sch Business, New Orleans, LA 70118 USA
来源
JUDGMENT AND DECISION MAKING | 2012年 / 7卷 / 01期
关键词
uncertainty effect; risk aversion; lottery; CHOICE; DISAPPOINTMENT; UNCERTAINTY; UTILITY;
D O I
暂无
中图分类号
B84 [心理学];
学科分类号
04 ; 0402 ;
摘要
Recent studies have identified the uncertainty effect (UE), whereby risky prospects (e. g., a binary lottery that offers either a $50 or $100 gift certificate) are valued less than their worst possible outcome (a $50 certificate). This effect has been proposed to result from "direct risk-aversion" which posits that the mere uncertainty of a lottery directly decreases its value. However, this effect may also be driven by the potential disappointment inherent in not receiving the better of the two outcomes (disappointment aversion), or the mere fact that the risky prospect is referred to as a "lottery". The results of two experiments do not support either of these two alternatives. Specifically, the results of Experiment 1 indicate that the UE is observed even when the values of the two lottery outcomes are similar, or even identical. Experiment 2 further replicates the UE in a context in which the word "lottery" is never used (a company promotional). These results are consistent with a direct risk-aversion mechanism (Gneezy et al., 2006; Simonsohn, 2009) and suggest that the UE obtains across a number of different contexts.
引用
收藏
页码:19 / 24
页数:6
相关论文
共 15 条
[1]  
[Anonymous], 2008, Blackwell Handbook of Judgment and Decision Making, DOI [DOI 10.1002/9780470752937.CH20, 10.1002/9780470752937.ch20]
[2]   DISAPPOINTMENT IN DECISION-MAKING UNDER UNCERTAINTY [J].
BELL, DE .
OPERATIONS RESEARCH, 1985, 33 (01) :1-27
[3]   The utility of gambling reconsidered [J].
Diecidue, E ;
Schmidt, U ;
Wakker, PP .
JOURNAL OF RISK AND UNCERTAINTY, 2004, 29 (03) :241-259
[4]   Religion and Gambling Among U.S. Adults: Exploring the Role of Traditions, Beliefs, Practices, and Networks [J].
Ellison, Christopher G. ;
McFarland, Michael J. .
JOURNAL FOR THE SCIENTIFIC STUDY OF RELIGION, 2011, 50 (01) :82-102
[5]   RISK, AMBIGUITY, AND THE SAVAGE AXIOMS [J].
ELLSBERG, D .
QUARTERLY JOURNAL OF ECONOMICS, 1961, 75 (04) :643-669
[6]  
Gneezy U, 2006, Q J ECON, V121, P1283, DOI 10.1093/qje/121.4.1283
[7]  
GOLDFARB RS, 1988, J ECON PERSPECT, V2, P179
[8]   Subjective relative income and lottery ticket purchases [J].
Haisley, Emily ;
Mostafa, Romel ;
Loewenstein, George .
JOURNAL OF BEHAVIORAL DECISION MAKING, 2008, 21 (03) :283-295
[9]   Decision Anomalies, Experimenter Assumptions, and Participants' Comprehension: Revaluating the Uncertainty Effect [J].
Keren, Gideon ;
Willemsen, Martijn C. .
JOURNAL OF BEHAVIORAL DECISION MAKING, 2009, 22 (03) :301-317
[10]   DISAPPOINTMENT AND DYNAMIC CONSISTENCY IN CHOICE UNDER UNCERTAINTY [J].
LOOMES, G ;
SUGDEN, R .
REVIEW OF ECONOMIC STUDIES, 1986, 53 (02) :271-282