IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/arx/papers/2309.01495.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Do Losses Matter? The Effect of Information-Search Technologies on Risky Choices

Author

Listed:
  • Luigi Mittone
  • Mauro Papi

Abstract

Despite its importance, relatively little attention has been devoted to studying the effects of exposing individuals to digital choice interfaces. In two pre-registered lottery-choice experiments, we administer three information-search technologies that are based on well-known heuristics: in the ABS (alternative-based search) treatment, subjects explore outcomes and corresponding probabilities within lotteries; in the CBS (characteristic-based search) treatment, subjects explore outcomes and corresponding probabilities across lotteries; in the Baseline treatment, subjects view outcomes and corresponding probabilities all at once. We find that (i) when lottery outcomes comprise gains and losses (experiment 1), exposing subjects to the CBS technology systematically makes them choose safer lotteries, compared to the subjects that are exposed to the other technologies, and (ii) when lottery outcomes comprise gains only (experiment 2), the above results are reversed: exposing subjects to the CBS technology systematically makes them choose riskier lotteries. By combining the information-search and choice analysis, we offer an interpretation of our results that is based on prospect theory, whereby the information-search technology subjects are exposed to contributes to determine the level of attention that the lottery attributes receive, which in turn has an effect on the reference point.

Suggested Citation

  • Luigi Mittone & Mauro Papi, 2023. "Do Losses Matter? The Effect of Information-Search Technologies on Risky Choices," Papers 2309.01495, arXiv.org.
    • Handle: RePEc:arx:papers:2309.01495
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://arxiv.org/pdf/2309.01495
    File Function: Latest version
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Richard H. Thaler & Shlomo Benartzi, 2004. "Save More Tomorrow (TM): Using Behavioral Economics to Increase Employee Saving," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 112(S1), pages 164-187, February.
    2. Xavier Gabaix & David Laibson & Guillermo Moloche & Stephen Weinberg, 2006. "Costly Information Acquisition: Experimental Analysis of a Boundedly Rational Model," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 96(4), pages 1043-1068, September.
    3. Daniel Kahneman & Amos Tversky, 2013. "Prospect Theory: An Analysis of Decision Under Risk," World Scientific Book Chapters, in: Leonard C MacLean & William T Ziemba (ed.), HANDBOOK OF THE FUNDAMENTALS OF FINANCIAL DECISION MAKING Part I, chapter 6, pages 99-127, World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd..
    4. Samek, Anya & Hur, Inkyoung & Kim, Sung-Hee & Yi, Ji Soo, 2016. "An experimental study of the decision process with interactive technology," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 130(C), pages 20-32.
    5. Hirmas, Alejandro & Engelmann, Jan B., 2023. "Impulsiveness moderates the effects of exogenous attention on the sensitivity to gains and losses in risky lotteries," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 95(C).
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Stefano DellaVigna, 2009. "Psychology and Economics: Evidence from the Field," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 47(2), pages 315-372, June.
    2. Philippe Fevrier & Sebastien Gay, 2005. "Informed Consent Versus Presumed Consent The Role of the Family in Organ Donations," HEW 0509007, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    3. Kim, Joonkyung & Zhao, Min & Soman, Dilip, 2023. "Converging vs diverging: The effect of visual representation of goal structure on financial decisions," International Journal of Research in Marketing, Elsevier, vol. 40(2), pages 362-377.
    4. Marianne Bertrand & Dean S. Karlan & Sendhil Mullainathan & Eldar Shafir & Jonathan Zinman, 2005. "What's Psychology Worth? A Field Experiment in the Consumer Credit Market," Working Papers 918, Economic Growth Center, Yale University.
    5. Damgaard, Mette Trier & Nielsen, Helena Skyt, 2018. "Nudging in education," Economics of Education Review, Elsevier, vol. 64(C), pages 313-342.
    6. Schnellenbach, Jan & Schubert, Christian, 2015. "Behavioral political economy: A survey," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 40(PB), pages 395-417.
    7. Meloria Meschi & Carla Pace, 2012. "Accounting for Behavioral Biases for Non-biased Demand Estimations," Chapters, in: Michael A. Crew & Paul R. Kleindorfer (ed.), Multi-Modal Competition and the Future of Mail, chapter 24, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    8. Damon Clark & David Gill & Victoria Prowse & Mark Rush, 2020. "Using Goals to Motivate College Students: Theory and Evidence From Field Experiments," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 102(4), pages 648-663, October.
    9. Ian Chadd & Emel Filiz-Ozbay & Erkut Y. Ozbay, 2021. "The relevance of irrelevant information," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 24(3), pages 985-1018, September.
    10. Syon P. Bhanot & Christina A. Roberto & Anjali Chainani & Charles Williamson & Mehra den Braven, 2019. "Testing effects of loss framing and checklists: evidence from a field experiment on wellness program participation in Philadelphia," Journal of the Economic Science Association, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 5(2), pages 210-222, December.
    11. Matthew P. Taylor, 2017. "Information Acquisition Under Risky Conditions Across Real And Hypothetical Settings," Economic Inquiry, Western Economic Association International, vol. 55(1), pages 352-367, January.
    12. Caspar G. Chorus & Benedict G. C. Dellaert, 2012. "Travel Choice Inertia: The Joint Role of Risk Aversion and Learning," Journal of Transport Economics and Policy, University of Bath, vol. 46(1), pages 139-155, January.
    13. Leiser, David & Azar, Ofer H. & Hadar, Liat, 2008. "Psychological construal of economic behavior," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 29(5), pages 762-776, November.
    14. Bockweg, Christian & Ponds, Eduard & Steenbeek, Onno & Vonken, Joyce, 2018. "Framing and the annuitization decision – Experimental evidence from a Dutch pension fund," Journal of Pension Economics and Finance, Cambridge University Press, vol. 17(3), pages 385-417, July.
    15. Francisco Gomes & Michael Haliassos & Tarun Ramadorai, 2021. "Household Finance," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 59(3), pages 919-1000, September.
    16. Blake, David & Boardman, Tom, 2010. "Spend more today: Using behavioural economics to improve retirement expenditure decisions," MPRA Paper 34234, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    17. K. Cuthbertson & D. Nitzsche & S. Hyde, 2007. "Monetary Policy And Behavioural Finance," Journal of Economic Surveys, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 21(5), pages 935-969, December.
    18. Gerlinde Fellner & Matthias Sutter, 2009. "Causes, Consequences, and Cures of Myopic Loss Aversion – An Experimental Investigation," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 119(537), pages 900-916, April.
    19. Sanjit Dhami & Narges Hajimoladarvish & Konstantinos Georgalos, 2023. "Precautionary Savings, Loss Aversion, and Risk: Theory and Evidence," CESifo Working Paper Series 10570, CESifo.
    20. Francesco Bogliacino & Cristiano Codagnone & Giuseppe Alessandro Veltri & Amitav Chakravarti & Pietro Ortoleva & George Gaskell & Andriy Ivchenko & Francisco Lupiáñez-Villanueva & Francesco Mureddu & , 2015. "Pathos & Ethos: Emotions and Willingness to Pay for Tobacco Products," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 10(10), pages 1-25, October.

    More about this item

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    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:arx:papers:2309.01495. 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.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc 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 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: arXiv administrators (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://arxiv.org/ .

    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.