IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/cup/judgdm/v19y2024ip-_6.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The impact of experience on the tendency to accept recommended defaults

Author

Listed:
  • Roth, Yefim
  • Waldman, Greta Maayan
  • Erev, Ido

Abstract

Two preregistered web studies are presented that explore the impact of experience on the tendency to accept recommended defaults. In each of the 100 trials, participants (n = 180, n = 165) could accept a recommended default option or choose a less attractive prospect. The location of the options (left or right) was randomly determined before each trial. Both studies compared two conditions. Under Condition Dominant, the default option maximized participants’ payoff in all trials. Under Condition Protective, the default option protected the participants from rare losses and maximized expected return but decreased payoff in most trials. The results reveal a tendency to accept the default in Condition Dominant but the opposite tendency in Condition Protective. This pattern was predicted by assuming that in addition to promoting specific actions, the presentation of the default changes the set of feasible strategies, and choice between these strategies reflects reliance on small samples of past experiences.

Suggested Citation

  • Roth, Yefim & Waldman, Greta Maayan & Erev, Ido, 2024. "The impact of experience on the tendency to accept recommended defaults," Judgment and Decision Making, Cambridge University Press, vol. 19, pages 1-1, January.
  • Handle: RePEc:cup:judgdm:v:19:y:2024:i::p:-_6
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.cambridge.org/core/product/identifier/S1930297523000499/type/journal_article
    File Function: link to article abstract page
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    More about this item

    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:cup:judgdm:v:19:y:2024:i::p:-_6. 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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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: Kirk Stebbing (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.cambridge.org/jdm .

    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.