Advanced Search
MyIDEAS: Login

Experimental Evidence for Attractions to Chance

Contents:

Author Info

  • Wulf Albers
  • Robin Pope
  • Reinhard Selten
  • Bodo Vogt

Abstract

Divide 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 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://www.wiwi.uni-bonn.de/bgsepapers/bonsfb/bonsfb461.pdf
Download Restriction: no
File URL: http://www.wiwi.uni-bonn.de/bgsepapers/bonsfb/bonsfb461.ps
Download Restriction: no

Bibliographic Info

Paper provided by University of Bonn, Germany in its series Discussion Paper Serie B with number 461.

as in new window
Length: pages
Date of creation: Dec 1999
Date of revision:
Handle: RePEc:bon:bonsfb:461

Contact details of provider:
Postal: Bonn Graduate School of Economics, University of Bonn, Adenauerallee 24 - 26, 53113 Bonn, Germany
Fax: +49 228 73 6884
Web page: http://www.bgse.uni-bonn.de/index.php?id=517

Related research

Keywords: attractions to chance; pre-outcome / post-outcome distinction; agreeable pre-outcome tension; exogenous changes in tension; exogenous changes in the scope for post-outcome elation; regret;

Other versions of this item:

Find related papers by JEL classification:

References

References listed on IDEAS
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.:
as in new window
  1. Tversky, Amos & Kahneman, Daniel, 1992. " Advances in Prospect Theory: Cumulative Representation of Uncertainty," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 5(4), pages 297-323, October.
  2. Pope, Robin, 1999. "Reconciliation with the Utility of Chance by Elaborated Outcomes Destroys the Axiomatic Basis of Expected Utility Theory," Discussion Paper Serie B 449, University of Bonn, Germany.
  3. Quiggin, John, 1982. "A theory of anticipated utility," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 3(4), pages 323-343, December.
  4. Robin Cubitt & Chris Starmer & Robert Sugden, 1998. "On the Validity of the Random Lottery Incentive System," Experimental Economics, Springer, vol. 1(2), pages 115-131, September.
Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

Citations

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

Cited by:
  1. Daniela Grieco & Robin Hogarth, 2004. "Excess entry, ambiguity seeking and competence: An experimental investigation," Economics Working Papers 778, Department of Economics and Business, Universitat Pompeu Fabra.
  2. Ronald Bosman & Frans van Winden, 2001. "Anticipated and Experienced Emotions in an Investment Experiment," Tinbergen Institute Discussion Papers 01-058/1, Tinbergen Institute.
  3. Urs Fischbacher & Christian Thöni, . "Excess Entry in an Experimental Winner-Take-All Market," IEW - Working Papers 086, Institute for Empirical Research in Economics - University of Zurich.
  4. Pierpaolo Battigalli & Martin Dufwenberg, 2005. "Dynamic Psychological Games," Working Papers 287, IGIER (Innocenzo Gasparini Institute for Economic Research), Bocconi University.
  5. Pablo Brañas-Garza, 2006. "Why gender based game theory?," ThE Papers 06/08, Department of Economic Theory and Economic History of the University of Granada..
  6. 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.
  7. Kjell Hausken, 2007. "Book Review," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 62(3), pages 303-309, May.
  8. Pope, Robin, 2004. "Biases from omitted risk effects in standard gamble utilities," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 23(4), pages 695-735, July.

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:bon:bonsfb:461

For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (BGSE Office).

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.