IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/ecj/econjl/v108y1998i447p477-89.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Probabilities vs Money: A Test of Some Fundamental Assumptions about Rational Decision Making

Author

Listed:
  • Loomes, Graham

Abstract

This paper describes an experiment where respondents were asked to tackle two decision tasks which were very similar in structure but which differed in that one problem involved direct money payoffs while the other involved payoffs in the form of probabilities of winning a given sum of money. According to most decision models, most risk averse individuals might be expected to behave quite differently under the two conditions. But the behavior actually observed does not accord with this expectation. The paper discusses possible reasons for this and the potential implications of such findings.

Suggested Citation

  • Loomes, Graham, 1998. "Probabilities vs Money: A Test of Some Fundamental Assumptions about Rational Decision Making," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 108(447), pages 477-489, March.
    • Handle: RePEc:ecj:econjl:v:108:y:1998:i:447:p:477-89
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.blackwell-synergy.com/servlet/useragent?func=synergy&synergyAction=showTOC&journalCode=ecoj&volume=108&issue=447&year=&part=null
    File Function: link to full text
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    Citations

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


    Cited by:

    1. A. Rubinstein, 2000. "A,A,A,A,A or A,A,B,C,D? Over-Diversification in Repeated Decision Problems," Princeton Economic Theory Papers 00s13, Economics Department, Princeton University.
    2. Albert Burgos, 2002. "Learning to deal with risk: what does reinforcement learning tell us about risk attitudes?," Economics Bulletin, AccessEcon, vol. 4(10), pages 1-13.
    3. Vital Anderhub & Simon Gächter & Manfred Königstein, 2002. "Efficient Contracting and Fair Play in a Simple Principal-Agent Experiment," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 5(1), pages 5-27, June.
    4. Butler, D. J., 2000. "Do non-expected utility choice patterns spring from hazy preferences? An experimental study of choice 'errors'," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 41(3), pages 277-297, March.
    5. Peter Wakker & Veronika Köbberling & Christiane Schwieren, 2007. "Prospect-theory’s Diminishing Sensitivity Versus Economics’ Intrinsic Utility of Money: How the Introduction of the Euro can be Used to Disentangle the Two Empirically," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 63(3), pages 205-231, November.
    6. Burgos, Albert, 1999. "Learning to deal with risk: what does reinforcement learning tell us about risk atittudes?," UC3M Working papers. Economics 6152, Universidad Carlos III de Madrid. Departamento de Economía.
    7. Di Caprio, Debora & Santos-Arteaga, Francisco J., 2011. "Cardinal versus ordinal criteria in choice under risk with disconnected utility ranges," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 47(4-5), pages 588-594.
    8. repec:ebl:ecbull:v:4:y:2002:i:10:p:1-13 is not listed on IDEAS
    9. Paul J. Healy & Yaron Azrieli & Christopher P. Chambers, 2016. "Incentives in Experiments: A Theoretical Analysis," Working Papers 16-03, Ohio State University, Department of Economics.
    10. repec:eee:eecrev:v:98:y:2017:i:c:p:1-31 is not listed on IDEAS
    11. Rubinstein, Ariel, 2002. "Irrational diversification in multiple decision problems," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 46(8), pages 1369-1378, September.
    12. T. Parker Ballinger & Michael G. Palumbo & Nathaniel T. Wilcox, 2003. "Precautionary saving and social learning across generations: an experiment," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 113(490), pages 920-947, October.

    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:ecj:econjl:v:108:y:1998:i:447:p:477-89. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Wiley-Blackwell Digital Licensing) or (Christopher F. Baum). General contact details of provider: http://edirc.repec.org/data/resssea.html .

    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 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.

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service hosted by the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis . RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.