Literature DB >> 16637767

The priority heuristic: making choices without trade-offs.

Eduard Brandstätter1, Gerd Gigerenzer, Ralph Hertwig.   

Abstract

Bernoulli's framework of expected utility serves as a model for various psychological processes, including motivation, moral sense, attitudes, and decision making. To account for evidence at variance with expected utility, the authors generalize the framework of fast and frugal heuristics from inferences to preferences. The priority heuristic predicts (a) the Allais paradox, (b) risk aversion for gains if probabilities are high, (c) risk seeking for gains if probabilities are low (e.g., lottery tickets), (d) risk aversion for losses if probabilities are low (e.g., buying insurance), (e) risk seeking for losses if probabilities are high, (f) the certainty effect, (g) the possibility effect, and (h) intransitivities. The authors test how accurately the heuristic predicts people's choices, compared with previously proposed heuristics and 3 modifications of expected utility theory: security-potential/aspiration theory, transfer-of-attention-exchange model, and cumulative prospect theory. ((c) 2006 APA, all rights reserved).

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2006        PMID: 16637767      PMCID: PMC2891015          DOI: 10.1037/0033-295X.113.2.409

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Psychol Rev        ISSN: 0033-295X            Impact factor:   8.934


  18 in total

1.  The Role of Aspiration Level in Risky Choice: A Comparison of Cumulative Prospect Theory and SP/A Theory.

Authors: 
Journal:  J Math Psychol       Date:  1999-06       Impact factor: 2.223

Review 2.  Experimental practices in economics: a methodological challenge for psychologists?

Authors:  R Hertwig; A Ortmann
Journal:  Behav Brain Sci       Date:  2001-06       Impact factor: 12.579

3.  Risk as feelings.

Authors:  G F Loewenstein; E U Weber; C K Hsee; N Welch
Journal:  Psychol Bull       Date:  2001-03       Impact factor: 17.737

4.  Subjective probabilities inferred from decisions.

Authors:  W EDWARDS
Journal:  Psychol Rev       Date:  1962-03       Impact factor: 8.934

5.  Decisions from experience and the effect of rare events in risky choice.

Authors:  Ralph Hertwig; Greg Barron; Elke U Weber; Ido Erev
Journal:  Psychol Sci       Date:  2004-08

Review 6.  New paradoxes of risky decision making.

Authors:  Michael H Birnbaum
Journal:  Psychol Rev       Date:  2008-04       Impact factor: 8.934

Review 7.  Decision field theory: a dynamic-cognitive approach to decision making in an uncertain environment.

Authors:  J R Busemeyer; J T Townsend
Journal:  Psychol Rev       Date:  1993-07       Impact factor: 8.934

8.  Two subjective scales of number.

Authors:  W P Banks; M J Coleman
Journal:  Percept Psychophys       Date:  1981-02

9.  How persuasive is a good fit? A comment on theory testing.

Authors:  S Roberts; H Pashler
Journal:  Psychol Rev       Date:  2000-04       Impact factor: 8.934

10.  Psychological models of professional decision making.

Authors:  Mandeep K Dhami
Journal:  Psychol Sci       Date:  2003-03
View more
  65 in total

1.  Prospects behind bars: analyzing decisions under risk in a prison population.

Authors:  Thorsten Pachur; Yaniv Hanoch; Michaela Gummerum
Journal:  Psychon Bull Rev       Date:  2010-10

Review 2.  Reconsidering "evidence" for fast-and-frugal heuristics.

Authors:  Benjamin E Hilbig
Journal:  Psychon Bull Rev       Date:  2010-12

3.  Testing transitivity of preferences on two-alternative forced choice data.

Authors:  Michel Regenwetter; Jason Dana; Clintin P Davis-Stober
Journal:  Front Psychol       Date:  2010-12-13

4.  Behavioural social choice: a status report.

Authors:  Michel Regenwetter; Bernard Grofman; Anna Popova; William Messner; Clintin P Davis-Stober; Daniel R Cavagnaro
Journal:  Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci       Date:  2009-03-27       Impact factor: 6.237

5.  Is Cognitive Impairment Related to Violations of Rationality? A Laboratory Alcohol Intoxication Study Testing Transitivity of Preference.

Authors:  Clintin P Davis-Stober; Denis M McCarthy; Daniel R Cavagnaro; Mason Price; Nicholas Brown; Sanghyuk Park
Journal:  Decision (Wash D C )       Date:  2018-07-23

6.  Perceptuo-motor, cognitive, and description-based decision-making seem equally good.

Authors:  Andreas Jarvstad; Ulrike Hahn; Simon K Rushton; Paul A Warren
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  2013-09-18       Impact factor: 11.205

7.  Learning the opportunity cost of time in a patch-foraging task.

Authors:  Sara M Constantino; Nathaniel D Daw
Journal:  Cogn Affect Behav Neurosci       Date:  2015-12       Impact factor: 3.282

8.  Explanations for side effect aversion in preventive medical treatment decisions.

Authors:  Erika A Waters; Neil D Weinstein; Graham A Colditz; Karen Emmons
Journal:  Health Psychol       Date:  2009-03       Impact factor: 4.267

9.  Neural signatures of intransitive preferences.

Authors:  Tobias Kalenscher; Philippe N Tobler; Willem Huijbers; Sander M Daselaar; Cyriel M A Pennartz
Journal:  Front Hum Neurosci       Date:  2010-06-09       Impact factor: 3.169

Review 10.  Good judgments do not require complex cognition.

Authors:  Julian N Marewski; Wolfgang Gaissmaier; Gerd Gigerenzer
Journal:  Cogn Process       Date:  2009-09-27
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.