Neural evidence for Reference-dependence in real-market-transactions

Human decision making has become one of the major research-foci in economics, marketing and in neuroscience. This study integrates perspectives from these disciplines by examining neurophysiological correlates to Reference-dependence of utility evaluations in real market contexts both before and after choice. First, by comparing buying and selling decisions, we observe an activation of the amygdala only in the latter. We interpret this as loss aversion with respect to prior possessions. This finding contributes to the settling of an ongoing fundamental dispute in economic theory by indicating the absence of loss aversion for money in routine transactions. Second, ex post satisfaction statements are accompanied by an activation of the reward processing orbitofrontal cortex, if the evaluation context is framed by a high external reference price instead of a lower internal reference price. This indicates a nonrational Reference-dependence--despite the neoclassical view of a rational Homo Economicus--of satisfaction measures and challenges a central marketing variable.

[1]  M. Kringelbach The human orbitofrontal cortex: linking reward to hedonic experience , 2005, Nature Reviews Neuroscience.

[2]  A. Tversky,et al.  Loss Aversion in Riskless Choice: A Reference-Dependent Model , 1991 .

[3]  A. Tversky,et al.  Prospect theory: analysis of decision under risk , 1979 .

[4]  Samuel M. McClure,et al.  The Neural Substrates of Reward Processing in Humans: The Modern Role of fMRI , 2004, The Neuroscientist : a review journal bringing neurobiology, neurology and psychiatry.

[5]  E. Murray,et al.  The amygdala and reward , 2002, Nature Reviews Neuroscience.

[6]  Colin Camerer Three Cheers—Psychological, Theoretical, Empirical—for Loss Aversion , 2005 .

[7]  D. Kahneman,et al.  Testing competing models of loss aversion: an adversarial collaboration , 2005 .

[8]  E. Procyk,et al.  Anterior cingulate error‐related activity is modulated by predicted reward , 2005, The European journal of neuroscience.

[9]  J. Hollerman,et al.  Changes in behavior-related neuronal activity in the striatum during learning , 2003, Trends in Neurosciences.

[10]  J. Gold Linking reward expectation to behavior in the basal ganglia , 2003, Trends in Neurosciences.

[11]  W. Michael Hanemann,et al.  Willingness To Pay and Willingness To Accept: How Much Can They Differ? Comment , 2003 .

[12]  Charles D. Kolstad,et al.  Information and the Divergence between Willingness to Accept and Willingness to Pay , 1999 .

[13]  D. Ariely,et al.  When Do Losses Loom Larger than Gains? , 2005 .

[14]  Ruth N. Bolton,et al.  A Dynamic Model of the Duration of the Customer's Relationship with a Continuous Service Provider: The Role of Satisfaction , 1994 .

[15]  R. Poldrack,et al.  Prospect theory on the brain? Toward a cognitive neuroscience of decision under risk. , 2005, Brain research. Cognitive brain research.

[16]  S. Wiens Interoception in emotional experience , 2005, Current opinion in neurology.

[17]  D. Kahneman,et al.  The Boundaries of Loss Aversion , 2005 .

[18]  A. Tversky,et al.  Judgment under Uncertainty: Heuristics and Biases , 1974, Science.

[19]  Praveen K. Kopalle,et al.  The impact of external reference price on consumer price expectations , 2003 .

[20]  A. Damasio,et al.  Deciding Advantageously Before Knowing the Advantageous Strategy , 1997, Science.

[21]  N. Tzourio-Mazoyer,et al.  Automated Anatomical Labeling of Activations in SPM Using a Macroscopic Anatomical Parcellation of the MNI MRI Single-Subject Brain , 2002, NeuroImage.

[22]  J. Shogren,et al.  Resolving Differences in Willingness to Pay and Willingness to Accept , 1997 .

[23]  A. Tversky,et al.  Prospect Theory : An Analysis of Decision under Risk Author ( s ) : , 2007 .

[24]  Jeffrey C. Cooper,et al.  Functional magnetic resonance imaging of reward prediction , 2005, Current opinion in neurology.

[25]  C. Plott,et al.  The Willingness to Pay-Willingness to Accept Gap, the 'Endowment Effect,' Subject Misconceptions, and Experimental Procedures for Eliciting Valuations , 2005 .

[26]  P. Holland,et al.  Amygdala–frontal interactions and reward expectancy , 2004, Current Opinion in Neurobiology.

[27]  Colin Camerer,et al.  When Does "Economic Man" Dominate Social Behavior? , 2006, Science.

[28]  M. Egan,et al.  Serotonin Transporter Genetic Variation and the Response of the Human Amygdala , 2002, Science.

[29]  Sheizaf Rafaeli,et al.  The effect of source nature and status on the subjective value of information , 2006 .

[30]  M. Yadav How Buyers Evaluate Product Bundles: A Model of Anchoring and Adjustment , 1994 .

[31]  J. O'Doherty,et al.  Regret and its avoidance: a neuroimaging study of choice behavior , 2005, Nature Neuroscience.

[32]  Brian Orland,et al.  Disparate WTA–WTP disparities: the influence of human versus natural causes , 1999 .

[33]  M. Petrides,et al.  Functional role of the basal ganglia in the planning and execution of actions , 2006, Annals of neurology.

[34]  M. Degroot,et al.  Measuring utility by a single-response sequential method. , 1964, Behavioral science.

[35]  D. Kahneman,et al.  Functional Imaging of Neural Responses to Expectancy and Experience of Monetary Gains and Losses tasks with monetary payoffs , 2001 .

[36]  Joseph J. Paton,et al.  The primate amygdala represents the positive and negative value of visual stimuli during learning , 2006, Nature.