期刊文献+

前景理论能否解释花生瓣形效应 被引量:4

Can the Peanut Effect Be Interpreted by Prospect Theory?
在线阅读 下载PDF
导出
摘要 为了探讨前景理论能否解释花生瓣形效应(一种风险倾向随决策所涉金额大小而发生变化的效应),研究构建了4个风险概率结构相同但金额大小不同的一系列决策任务,并同时设计两种不同角度的参照点探测任务,以考察博弈活动所花时间的价值或获得情境下对获得的一般期望值能否作为前景理论的参照点,进而使得花生瓣形效应为前景理论所解释。结果发现,以一般期望值为参照点时,前景理论可以对花生瓣形效应作出比较好的解释,但博弈活动所花时间价值不可。 In order to test whether prospect theory can interpret the peanut effect or not, we conducted a series of decision tasks different in magnitude of payoff only and a research about differences between how much the value of time the subject would like to spend in the decision task and how much the value of payoff in each decision task, as well as a research about the differences between how much the value of the subject would be expected in an unexpected gaining condition and the value of payoff would be in each decision task. The result showed that the subjects in the small payoff decision tasks were risk seekers, but the subjects in large payoff decision tasks displayed aversion. Their behavior in decision making could be betler interpreted by prospect theory when the value of the subject which would be expected in an unexpected gaining condition Was used as the reference point.
出处 《心理科学》 CSSCI CSCD 北大核心 2010年第1期126-129,117,共5页 Journal of Psychological Science
基金 国家自然科学基金青年科学基金项目(30800297) 高等学校省级优秀青年人才基金项目(2009SQRS025) 安徽师范大学专项基金项目(2009xzx02)资助 属安徽师范大学学校心理学创新团队建设成果
关键词 花生瓣形效应 前景理论 时间 期望 peanut effect, prospect theory, the value of time, The value of expectation
  • 相关文献

参考文献22

  • 1Markowitz, H. The utility of wealth. Journal of Political Economy, 1952,60(2), 151 - 158.
  • 2艾森克,基恩.认知心理学.第四版.译者:高定国,肖晓云.上海:华东师范大学出版社,2003.741-743.
  • 3Bosch - Dome' nech A, Silvestre J.Does risk aversion or attraction depend on income? An experiment. Economics Letters. 1999,65 (3), 265 - 273.
  • 4Chinn Ping F. Allais paradox in the small. Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization. 2002, 49: 411- 421.
  • 5Li, S. What is wrong with Allais' certainty effect? Journal of Behavioral Decision Making, 1993,6, 271 - 281.
  • 6Weber B J, Chapman G.B. Playing for peanuts: why is risk seeking more common for low-stakes gambles? Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 2005,97 : 31 - 46.
  • 7Rabin M. Risk aversion and expected utility theory: A calibration theorem. Econometrica. 2000,68: 1281- 1292.
  • 8Rabin M, Thaler R H. Anomalies: Risk aversion. J. Econ. Perspect. 2001,15, 219- 232.
  • 9Prelec D, Loewenstein L. Decision making over time and under uncertainty: A common approach. Management Science, 1991,37, 770 - 786.
  • 10Tversky, A., & Kahneman, D.. Advances in Prospect Theory-Cumulative representation of uncertainty. Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, 1992,5, 297 - 323.

二级参考文献110

  • 1何贵兵.动态两难对策中信息反馈方式对合作行为的影响[J].心理科学,2004,27(4):876-880. 被引量:16
  • 2Hastie, R. Problems for judgment and decision making. Annual Review of Psychology, 2001, 52:653 -684.
  • 3Edwards, W, Fasolo, B. Decision Technology. Annual Review of Psychology, 2001, 52:581-606.
  • 4Mellers, B, Schwartz, A, Ritov, I. Emotion- based choice.Journal of Experimental psychology: General, 1999, 128: 332- 345.
  • 5Zajonc, R B. Feeling and thinking: Preferences need no inference.American Psycholgist, 1980, 35 : 151 - 175.
  • 6Schwarz, N, Clore, G L Mood, misattribution, and judgments of well- being: Information and directive functions of affective states.Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 1983, 45 : 513 - 523.
  • 7Finucane, M, Alhakami, A, Slovic, P, Johnson S M. The affect heuristic in judgments of risks and benefits. Journal of Behavioral Decision Making, 2000, 13 : 1 - 17.
  • 8Loewenstein, G F, Weber, E U, Hsee, C K, Welch, N.Risk as feelings. Psychological Bulletin, 2001,127..267 - 286.
  • 9Hsee, C K , Weber, E U. A fundamental prediction error: Self-other discrepancies in risk preference. Journal of Experimental psychology: General, 1997,126:45 - 53.
  • 10Ordonez, L D , Benson Ⅲ, L, Beach, L R. Testing the compatibility test: How instructions, accountability, and anticipated regret affect prechoice screening of options. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 1999,78:63- 80.

共引文献172

同被引文献42

引证文献4

二级引证文献5

相关作者

内容加载中请稍等...

相关机构

内容加载中请稍等...

相关主题

内容加载中请稍等...

浏览历史

内容加载中请稍等...
;
使用帮助 返回顶部