...
  • 主题
高级搜索  >
历史搜索 清空历史
首页> 外文期刊>Journal of experimental psychology. Learning, memory, and cognition >Comparing Theories of Reference-Dependent Choice
【24h】

Comparing Theories of Reference-Dependent Choice

机译：比较参考依赖性选择的理论

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           
页面导航
  • 摘要
  • 著录项
  • 相似文献
  • 相关主题

摘要

Preferences are influenced by the presence or absence of salient choice options, known as reference points. This behavioral tendency is traditionally attributed to the loss aversion and diminishing sensitivity assumptions of prospect theory. In contrast, some psychological research suggests that reference dependence is caused by attentional biases that increase the subjective weighting of the reference point's primary attributes. Although both theories are able to successfully account for behavioral findings involving reference dependence, this article shows that these theories make diverging choice predictions when available options are inferior to the reference point. It presents the results of 2 studies that use settings with inferior choice options to compare these 2 theories. The analysis involves quantitative fits to participant-level choice data, and the results indicate that most participants are better described by models with attentional bias than they are by models with loss aversion and diminishing sensitivity. These differences appear to be caused by violations of loss aversion and diminishing sensitivity in losses.
机译：偏好受到突出选择选项的存在或不存在的影响，称为参考点。这种行为趋势传统上归因于丢失厌恶和前景理论的敏感性假设递减。相比之下，一些心理研究表明，参考依赖性是由提高参考点的主要属性的主观加权的注意力偏差引起的。尽管两个理论都能够成功地解释涉及参考依赖性的行为发现，但是本文表明，当可用选项不如参考点时，这些理论在发散的选择预测。它提出了2项研究的结果，它使用具有劣种选择选项的设置来比较这两个理论。分析涉及对参与者级选择数据的定量适合，结果表明，大多数参与者更好地描述了由于具有损耗厌恶和敏感性递减的模型的模型。这些差异似乎是由于违反损失厌恶和损失敏感性递减而引起的。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱：kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备：11010802029741号 ICP备案号：京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有

  • 客服微信

  • 服务号