IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/cup/judgdm/v5y2010i5p339-346_2.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Bracketing effects on risk tolerance: Generalizability and underlying mechanisms

Author

Listed:
  • Moher, Ester
  • Koehler, Derek J.

Abstract

Research has shown that risk tolerance increases when multiple decisions and associated outcomes are presented together in a broader “bracket” rather than one at a time. The present studies disentangle the influence of problem bracketing (presenting multiple investment options together) from that of outcome bracketing (presenting the aggregated outcomes of multiple decisions), factors which have been deliberately confounded in previous research. In the standard version of the bracketing task, in which participants decide how much of an initial endowment to invest into each in a series of repeated, identical gambles, we find a problem bracketing effect but not an outcome bracketing effect. However, this pattern of results does not generalize to the cases of non-identical gambles nor discrete choice, where we fail to find the standard bracketing effect.

Suggested Citation

  • Moher, Ester & Koehler, Derek J., 2010. "Bracketing effects on risk tolerance: Generalizability and underlying mechanisms," Judgment and Decision Making, Cambridge University Press, vol. 5(5), pages 339-346, August.
    • Handle: RePEc:cup:judgdm:v:5:y:2010:i:5:p:339-346_2
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.cambridge.org/core/product/identifier/S193029750000214X/type/journal_article
    File Function: link to article abstract page
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:cup:judgdm:v:5:y:2010:i:5:p:339-346_2. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Kirk Stebbing (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.cambridge.org/jdm .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.