Experimental Evidence for Attractions to Chance
AbstractDivide the decisionmaker's future into: (i) a pre-outcome period (lasting from the decision until the outcome of that decision is known), and (ii) a sequel post-outcome period (beginning when the outcome becomes known). Anticipated emotions in both periods may influence the decision, in particular, with regard to an outcome that matters to the person, the enjoyable tension from not yet knowing what this outcome will be. In the experiments presented, lottery choice can be explained by this attraction to chance, and cannot be explained by either convex von Neumann^Morgenstern utility, or by rank dependent risk loving weights: attraction to chance is a separate motivator.
Download InfoTo our knowledge, this item is not available for download. To find whether it is available, there are three options:
1. Check below under "Related research" whether another version of this item is available online.
2. Check on the provider's web page whether it is in fact available.
3. Perform a search for a similarly titled item that would be available.
Bibliographic InfoPaper provided by Bielefeld University, Center for Mathematical Economics in its series Working Papers with number 317.
Date of creation: Dec 1999
Date of revision:
Other versions of this item:
- Wulf Albers & Robin Pope & Reinhard Selten & Bodo Vogt, 1999. "Experimental Evidence for Attractions to Chance," Discussion Paper Serie B, University of Bonn, Germany 461, University of Bonn, Germany.
- D81 - Microeconomics - - Information, Knowledge, and Uncertainty - - - Criteria for Decision-Making under Risk and Uncertainty
Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:
- Pope, Robin, 1999. "Reconciliation with the Utility of Chance by Elaborated Outcomes Destroys the Axiomatic Basis of Expected Utility Theory," Discussion Paper Serie B, University of Bonn, Germany 449, University of Bonn, Germany.
- Quiggin, John, 1982. "A theory of anticipated utility," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, Elsevier, vol. 3(4), pages 323-343, December.
- Robin Cubitt & Chris Starmer & Robert Sugden, 1998. "On the Validity of the Random Lottery Incentive System," Experimental Economics, Springer, Springer, vol. 1(2), pages 115-131, September.
- Tversky, Amos & Kahneman, Daniel, 1992. " Advances in Prospect Theory: Cumulative Representation of Uncertainty," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, Springer, vol. 5(4), pages 297-323, October.
- Battigalli, Pierpaolo & Dufwenberg, Martin, 2009.
"Dynamic psychological games,"
Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier,
Elsevier, vol. 144(1), pages 1-35, January.
- Pierpaolo Battigalli & Martin Dufwenberg, 2005. "Dynamic Psychological Games," Working Papers 287, IGIER (Innocenzo Gasparini Institute for Economic Research), Bocconi University.
- Pierpaolo Battigalli & Martin Dufwenberg, 2005. "Dynamic Psychological Games," Levine's Bibliography 784828000000000046, UCLA Department of Economics.
- Daniela Grieco & Robin Hogarth, 2004. "Excess entry, ambiguity seeking and competence: An experimental investigation," Economics Working Papers, Department of Economics and Business, Universitat Pompeu Fabra 778, Department of Economics and Business, Universitat Pompeu Fabra.
- Pablo Brañas-Garza, 2006. "Why gender based game theory?," ThE Papers, Department of Economic Theory and Economic History of the University of Granada. 06/08, Department of Economic Theory and Economic History of the University of Granada..
- Fischbacher, Urs & Thöni, Christian, 2008.
"Excess entry in an experimental winner-take-all market,"
Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier,
Elsevier, vol. 67(1), pages 150-163, July.
- Urs Fischbacher & Christian Thöni, . "Excess Entry in an Experimental Winner-Take-All Market," IEW - Working Papers, Institute for Empirical Research in Economics - University of Zurich 086, Institute for Empirical Research in Economics - University of Zurich.
- Pope, Robin, 2004. "Biases from omitted risk effects in standard gamble utilities," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, Elsevier, vol. 23(4), pages 695-735, July.
- Heufer, Jan, 2013. "Quasiconcave preferences on the probability simplex: A nonparametric analysis," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, Elsevier, vol. 65(1), pages 21-30.
- Heldmann, Marcus & Vogt, Bodo & Heinze, Hans-Jochen & Münte, Thomas, 2009. "Different methods to define utility functions yield different results and engage different neural processes," FEMM Working Papers 09014, Otto-von-Guericke University Magdeburg, Faculty of Economics and Management.
- Kjell Hausken, 2007. "Book Review," Theory and Decision, Springer, Springer, vol. 62(3), pages 303-309, May.
- Ronald Bosman & Frans van Winden, 2001. "Anticipated and Experienced Emotions in an Investment Experiment," Tinbergen Institute Discussion Papers, Tinbergen Institute 01-058/1, Tinbergen Institute.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Dr. Frederik Herzberg).
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.