Advanced Search
MyIDEAS: Login to save this article or follow this journal

Are Preference Reversals Errors? An Experimental Investigation

Contents:

Author Info

  • Ulrich Schmidt

    ()

  • John D. Hey

    ()

Abstract

This paper investigates whether some part of the preference reversal phenomenon can be attributed to errors in the responses of subjects in experiments. Such errors have been well documented in other investigations of behaviour in risky decision problems, but their relevance to the preference reversal phenomenon has not been explored. Building on earlier work, we develop an extended error model and apply it to the results of an experiment in which subjects tackle risky choice problems on five separate occasions. In this experiment subjects had to answer choice questions in three occasions and to state selling and buying prices in the remaining two occasions. Our results indicate that scale compatibility can be ruled out as a significant sole explanation of the preference reversal phenomenon. Moreover, we can show that a considerable fraction of observed preference reversals can be classified as pricing errors, whereas choice errors turn out to play a minor role.

Download Info

If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.
File URL: http://journals.kluweronline.com/issn/0895-5646/contents
Download Restriction: no

Bibliographic Info

Article provided by Springer in its journal Journal of Risk and Uncertainty.

Volume (Year): 29 (2004)
Issue (Month): 3 (December)
Pages: 207-218

as in new window
Handle: RePEc:kap:jrisku:v:29:y:2004:i:3:p:207-218

Contact details of provider:
Web page: http://www.springerlink.com/link.asp?id=100299

Related research

Keywords:

References

No references listed on IDEAS
You can help add them by filling out this form.

Citations

Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
as in new window

Cited by:
  1. Booij, Adam S. & van Praag, Bernard M.S., 2009. "A simultaneous approach to the estimation of risk aversion and the subjective time discount rate," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 70(1-2), pages 374-388, May.
  2. John D. Hey & Andrea Morone & Ulrich Schmidt, 2007. "Noise and Bias in Eliciting Preferences," Kiel Working Papers 1386, Kiel Institute for the World Economy.
  3. Berg, Joyce E. & Dickhaut, John W. & Rietz, Thomas A., 2010. "Preference reversals: The impact of truth-revealing monetary incentives," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 68(2), pages 443-468, March.
  4. Pavlo Blavatskyy, 2009. "Preference reversals and probabilistic decisions," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 39(3), pages 237-250, December.
  5. Pavlo Blavatskyy, 2014. "Stronger utility," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 76(2), pages 265-286, February.
  6. Attema, Arthur & Brouwer, Werner, 2012. "In search of a preferred preference elicitation method: A test of the internal consistency of choice and matching tasks," MPRA Paper 36100, University Library of Munich, Germany.
  7. Anna Maffioletti & Ulrich Schmidt & Carsten Schröder, 2009. "The effect of elicitation methods on ambiguity aversion: an experimental investigation," Economics Bulletin, AccessEcon, vol. 29(2), pages 638-643.
  8. Pavlo Blavatskyy, 2012. "Probabilistic choice and stochastic dominance," Economic Theory, Springer, vol. 50(1), pages 59-83, May.
  9. David J. Butler & Graham C. Loomes, 2007. "Imprecision as an Account of the Preference Reversal Phenomenon," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 97(1), pages 277-297, March.
  10. Aurora García-Gallego & Nikolaos Georgantzís & Daniel Navarro-Martínez & Gerardo Sabater-Grande, 2011. "The stochastic component in choice and regression to the mean," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 71(2), pages 251-267, August.
  11. Ulrich Schmidt & Chris Starmer & Robert Sugden, 2008. "Third-generation prospect theory," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 36(3), pages 203-223, June.

Lists

This item is not listed on Wikipedia, on a reading list or among the top items on IDEAS.

Statistics

Access and download statistics

Corrections

When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:kap:jrisku:v:29:y:2004:i:3:p:207-218. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Guenther Eichhorn) or (Christopher F. Baum).

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.

If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.

If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link to it, you can help with 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 profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

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