Framing in the field. A simple experiment on the reflection effect
AbstractThis study makes use of an unusual opportunity to manipulate framing of a simple decision under uncertainty: whether or not to answer an exam question when unsure which answer is correct and a missing response is scored higher than an incorrect one. Two treatments were compared in a natural field experiment: one in which the decision was framed in terms of losses, and the other – in terms of gains. Some alternative theories of decision making under risk, notably prospect theory, propose that individuals display reflection effect, i.e. tend to be more risk-seeking in losses than gains. No such evidence was found: subjects were generally risk-averse and this disposition was not affected by treatment.
Download InfoIf 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.
Bibliographic InfoPaper provided by Faculty of Economic Sciences, University of Warsaw in its series Working Papers with number 2011-14.
Length: 14 pages
Date of creation: 2011
Date of revision:
framing; reflection effect; field experiments;
Find related papers by JEL classification:
- C93 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Design of Experiments - - - Field Experiments
- D81 - Microeconomics - - Information, Knowledge, and Uncertainty - - - Criteria for Decision-Making under Risk and Uncertainty
This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:
- NEP-ALL-2011-07-02 (All new papers)
- NEP-EXP-2011-07-02 (Experimental Economics)
- NEP-UPT-2011-07-02 (Utility Models & Prospect Theory)
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.:
- Trautmann, S.T. & Vieider, F.M. & Wakker, P.P., 2008.
"Causes of ambiguity aversion: Known versus unknown preferences,"
Open Access publications from Tilburg University
urn:nbn:nl:ui:12-3160951, Tilburg University.
- Stefan Trautmann & Ferdinand Vieider & Peter Wakker, 2008. "Causes of ambiguity aversion: Known versus unknown preferences," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 36(3), pages 225-243, June.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Marcin Bąba).
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.