IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/r/eee/matsoc/v23y1992i3p255-282.html

Fundamental derivations from decision field theory

Citations

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


Cited by:

  1. Fisher, Geoffrey, 2021. "A multiattribute attentional drift diffusion model," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 165(C), pages 167-182.
  2. Nova, Gabriel & Guevara, C. Angelo & Hess, Stephane & Hancock, Thomas O., 2025. "A random utility maximisation model considering the information search process," Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Elsevier, vol. 199(C).
  3. Drew Fudenberg & Whitney Newey & Philipp Strack & Tomasz Strzalecki, 2020. "Testing the drift-diffusion model," Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, vol. 117(52), pages 33141-33148, December.
  4. Ryan Webb, 2019. "The (Neural) Dynamics of Stochastic Choice," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 65(1), pages 230-255, January.
  5. Nathaniel T. Wilcox, 2023. "Unusual Estimates of Probability Weighting Functions," Research in Experimental Economics, in: Models of Risk Preferences: Descriptive and Normative Challenges, volume 22, pages 69-106, Emerald Group Publishing Limited.
  6. Kechagia, Varvara & Drichoutis, Andreas C., 2016. "The effect of olfactory sensory cues on economic decision making," MPRA Paper 75293, University Library of Munich, Germany.
  7. Hancock, Thomas O. & Hess, Stephane & Choudhury, Charisma F. & Tsoleridis, Panagiotis, 2024. "Decision field theory: An extension for real-world settings," Journal of choice modelling, Elsevier, vol. 52(C).
  8. Hancock, Thomas O. & Hess, Stephane & Marley, A.A.J. & Choudhury, Charisma F., 2021. "An accumulation of preference: Two alternative dynamic models for understanding transport choices," Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Elsevier, vol. 149(C), pages 250-282.
  9. Blavatskyy, Pavlo, 2019. "Future plans and errors," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 102(C), pages 85-92.
  10. Nathaniel T. Wilcox, 2015. "Error and Generalization in Discrete Choice Under Risk," Working Papers 15-11, Chapman University, Economic Science Institute.
  11. Maria J. Ruiz Martos, 2018. "Sequential Common Consequence Effect and Incentives," ThE Papers 18/04, Department of Economic Theory and Economic History of the University of Granada..
  12. 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.
  13. Jochen Ranger & Jörg-Tobias Kuhn & José-Luis Gaviria, 2015. "A Race Model for Responses and Response Times in Tests," Psychometrika, Springer;The Psychometric Society, vol. 80(3), pages 791-810, September.
  14. Maria J. Ruiz Martos, 2017. "Individual Dynamic Choice Behaviour and the Common Consequence Effect," ThE Papers 17/01, Department of Economic Theory and Economic History of the University of Granada..
  15. Hess, Stephane & Palma, David, 2019. "Apollo: A flexible, powerful and customisable freeware package for choice model estimation and application," Journal of choice modelling, Elsevier, vol. 32(C), pages 1-1.
  16. Busemeyer, Jerome R. & Diederich, Adele, 2002. "Survey of decision field theory," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 43(3), pages 345-370, July.
  17. Szép, Teodóra & van Cranenburgh, Sander & Chorus, Caspar G., 2022. "Decision Field Theory: Equivalence with probit models and guidance for identifiability," Journal of choice modelling, Elsevier, vol. 45(C).
  18. Hancock, Thomas O. & Broekaert, Jan & Hess, Stephane & Choudhury, Charisma F., 2020. "Quantum probability: A new method for modelling travel behaviour," Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Elsevier, vol. 139(C), pages 165-198.
  19. Kechagia, Varvara & Drichoutis, Andreas C., 2017. "The effect of olfactory sensory cues on willingness to pay and choice under risk," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 70(C), pages 33-46.
  20. Khai Xiang Chiong & Matthew Shum & Ryan Webb & Richard Chen, 2024. "Combining Choice and Response Time Data: A Drift-Diffusion Model of Mobile Advertisements," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 70(2), pages 1238-1257, February.
  21. Holden, Stein T. & Tilahun, Mesfin, 2019. "How related are risk preferences and time preferences?," CLTS Working Papers 4/19, Norwegian University of Life Sciences, Centre for Land Tenure Studies, revised 16 Oct 2019.
  22. Hancock, Thomas O. & Hess, Stephane & Choudhury, Charisma F., 2018. "Decision field theory: Improvements to current methodology and comparisons with standard choice modelling techniques," Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Elsevier, vol. 107(C), pages 18-40.
  23. Jiangbo Yu, 2022. "An elementary mechanism for simultaneously modeling discrete decisions and decision times," System Dynamics Review, System Dynamics Society, vol. 38(3), pages 215-245, July.
  24. Thomas O. Hancock & Stephane Hess & Charisma F. Choudhury, 2025. "Beyond utility: incorporating eye-tracking, skin conductance and heart rate data into cognitive and econometric travel behaviour models," Papers 2506.18068, arXiv.org.
  25. Holden , Stein T. & Tilahun , Mesfin, 2019. "The Devil is in the Details: Risk Preferences, Choice List Design, and Measurement Error," CLTS Working Papers 3/19, Norwegian University of Life Sciences, Centre for Land Tenure Studies, revised 16 Oct 2019.
  26. Drichoutis, Andreas C. & Nayga, Rodolfo M., 2022. "Game form recognition in preference elicitation, cognitive abilities, and cognitive load," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 193(C), pages 49-65.
IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.