IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/r/eee/poleco/v13y1997i3p575-589.html
   My bibliography  Save this item

Decoy alternatives in policy choices: Asymmetric domination and compromise effects

Citations

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


Cited by:

  1. Fabio Galeotti & Maria Montero & Anders Poulsen, 2022. "The Attraction and Compromise Effects in Bargaining: Experimental Evidence," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 68(4), pages 2987-3007, April.
  2. Zuzana Gocmanová & Jaromír Skorkovský & Štěpán Veselý & Jan Böhm, 2019. "Where Do You Want to Go Skiing? The Effect of the Reference Point and Loss Aversion," Acta Universitatis Agriculturae et Silviculturae Mendelianae Brunensis, Mendel University Press, vol. 67(1), pages 243-252.
  3. Efe A. Ok & Pietro Ortoleva & Gil Riella, 2011. "Theory of Product Differentiation in the presence of the Attraction Effect," Working Papers 2011-3, Princeton University. Economics Department..
  4. Matthew Kovach & Gerelt Tserenjigmid, 2023. "The Focal Quantal Response Equilibrium," Papers 2304.00438, arXiv.org.
  5. Dongwoo Lee & Hans Haller, 2022. "Selective attribute rules," Journal of Economics, Springer, vol. 137(3), pages 229-254, December.
  6. Echenique, Federico & Saito, Kota & Tserenjigmid, Gerelt, 2018. "The perception-adjusted Luce model," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 93(C), pages 67-76.
  7. Raphael Becker & Arye Hillman & Niklas Potrafke & Alexander Schwemmer, 2015. "The preoccupation of the United Nations with Israel: Evidence and theory," The Review of International Organizations, Springer, vol. 10(4), pages 413-437, December.
  8. Niklas Potrafke, 2012. "Islam and democracy," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 151(1), pages 185-192, April.
  9. Sürücü, Oktay & Djawadi, Behnud Mir & Recker, Sonja, 2019. "The asymmetric dominance effect: Reexamination and extension in risky choice – An experimental study," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 73(C), pages 102-122.
  10. Ekström, Mathias, 2018. "The (un)compromise effect," Discussion Paper Series in Economics 10/2018, Norwegian School of Economics, Department of Economics, revised 16 May 2018.
  11. Simonson, Itamar, 2014. "The BDT Effect and Future: A Reply to John Lynch and Norbert Schwarz," Research Papers 3163, Stanford University, Graduate School of Business.
  12. T. Hayashi & R. Jain & V. Korpela & M. Lombardi, 2023. "Behavioral strong implementation," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 76(4), pages 1257-1287, November.
  13. David M. Harrison & Kimberly F. Luchtenberg & Michael J. Seiler, 2023. "Improving Mortgage Default Collection Efforts by Employing the Decoy Effect," The Journal of Real Estate Finance and Economics, Springer, vol. 66(4), pages 840-860, May.
  14. Ekström, Mathias, 2021. "The (un)compromise effect: How suggested alternatives can promote active choice," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 90(C).
  15. Nasim Mousavi & Panagiotis Adamopoulos & Jesse Bockstedt, 2023. "The Decoy Effect and Recommendation Systems," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 34(4), pages 1533-1553, December.
  16. Tserenjigmid, Gerelt, 2019. "Choosing with the worst in mind: A reference-dependent model," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 157(C), pages 631-652.
  17. Dahremöller, Carsten & Fels, Markus, 2015. "Product lines, product design, and limited attention," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 119(C), pages 437-456.
  18. (Gina) Cui, Yuanyuan & (Sam) Kim, Seongseop & Kim, Jungkeun, 2021. "Impact of preciseness of price presentation on the magnitude of compromise and decoy effects," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 132(C), pages 641-652.
  19. Sürücü, Oktay & Brangewitz, Sonja & Mir Djawadi, Behnud, 2017. "Asymmetric dominance effect with multiple decoys for low- and high-variance lotteries," Center for Mathematical Economics Working Papers 574, Center for Mathematical Economics, Bielefeld University.
  20. Li, Shengwu & Yu, Ning Neil, 2018. "Context-dependent choice as explained by foraging theory," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 175(C), pages 159-177.
  21. Castillo, Geoffrey, 2020. "The attraction effect and its explanations," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 119(C), pages 123-147.
  22. Marco Marini & Alessandro Ansani & Fabio Paglieri, 2020. "Attraction comes from many sources: Attentional and comparative processes in decoy effects," Judgment and Decision Making, Society for Judgment and Decision Making, vol. 15(5), pages 704-726, September.
  23. MS. Eric Santosa, 2020. "Trying to Deteriorate an Attraction Effect: A Lesson for Challengers," Academic Journal of Interdisciplinary Studies, Richtmann Publishing Ltd, vol. 9, November.
  24. repec:cup:judgdm:v:15:y:2020:i:5:p:704-726 is not listed on IDEAS
  25. Kaisa Herne, 1999. "The Effects of Decoy Gambles on Individual Choice," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 2(1), pages 31-40, August.
  26. Ayala Arad & Benjamin Bachi & Amnon Maltz, 2023. "On the relevance of irrelevant strategies," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 26(5), pages 1142-1184, November.
  27. Nosratabadi, Hassan, 2022. "Reference-dependent choice under plurality rule," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 115(C), pages 88-98.
  28. Efe A. Ok & Pietro Ortoleva & Gil Riella, 2015. "Revealed (P)Reference Theory," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 105(1), pages 299-321, January.
  29. Heydari, Pedram, 2021. "Luce arbitrates: Stochastic resolution of inner conflicts," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 126(C), pages 33-74.
IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.