Multiple prospect framing and decision behavior: The mediational roles of perceived riskiness and perceived ambiguity

Decision makers facing a multiple prospect, which is a bundle of single prospects, are influenced by whether outcome information is framed narrowly (segregated) or broadly (aggregated). The present research hypothesizes perceived riskiness and perceived ambiguity as two distinct mediators of the effect of broad versus narrow prospect framing on decision behavior. Perceived riskiness and perceived ambiguity were conceptually defined as psychological constructs and new multi-item scales were developed and validated to operationalize them. Two experiments (a 100-shot gamble in Experiment 1, N = 118, and a 30-year retirement investment in Experiment 2, N = 84) were conducted. Both experiments supported all three hypotheses: riskiness and ambiguity perceptions were distinct constructs (Hypothesis 1), perceived riskiness mediated the effect of multiple prospect framing on decision behavior (Hypothesis 2), and perceived ambiguity mediated the effect of multiple prospect framing on decision behavior (Hypothesis 3). These findings advance our understanding of the psychological mechanisms underlying framing effects for multiple prospects and have substantial business and policy implications.

[1]  K. A. Ericsson,et al.  Verbal reports as data. , 1980 .

[2]  P. Slovic.  Perception of risk. , 1987, Science.

[3]  Kelly E. See,et al.  Belief and Preference in Decision Under Uncertainty , 2006 .

[4]  Peter P. Wakker,et al.  Making Descriptive Use of Prospect Theory to Improve the Prescriptive Use of Expected Utility , 2001, Manag. Sci..

[5]  W. Kip Viscusi,et al.  Bayesian decisions with ambiguous belief aversion , 1992 .

[6]  Timothy D. Wilson,et al.  Telling more than we can know: Verbal reports on mental processes. , 1977 .

[7]  P. Shrout,et al.  Mediation in experimental and nonexperimental studies: new procedures and recommendations. , 2002, Psychological methods.

[8]  L. Cosmides,et al.  When and why do people avoid unknown probabilities in decisions under uncertainty? Testing some predictions from optimal foraging theory , 1999, Cognition.

[9]  J. Frank Yates,et al.  The risk construct. , 1992 .

[10]  Jonathan Baron,et al.  Ambiguous Probabilities and the Paradoxes of Expected Utility , 2022 .

[11]  J. Kagel,et al.  Handbook of Experimental Economics , 1997 .

[12]  Donald A. Redelmeier,et al.  On the Framing of Multiple Prospects , 1992 .

[13]  Shawn P. Curley,et al.  An empirical evaluation of descriptive models of ambiguity reactions in choice situations , 1989 .

[14]  D. Mackinnon,et al.  Equivalence of the Mediation, Confounding and Suppression Effect , 2000, Prevention Science.

[15]  Mary Zey-Ferrell,et al.  Decision making : alternatives to rational choice models , 1992 .

[16]  R. Selten,et al.  Bounded rationality: The adaptive toolbox , 2000 .

[17]  P. Tetlock,et al.  Accounting for the effects of accountability. , 1999, Psychological bulletin.

[18]  Craig R. Fox,et al.  Ambiguity Aversion and Comparative Ignorance , 1995 .

[19]  N. Liang.  Decision Making: Alternatives to Rational Choice Models , 1994 .

[20]  R. Hogarth,et al.  Venture Theory: A Model of Decision Weights , 1990 .

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

[22]  R. L. Keeney,et al.  Decisions with Multiple Objectives: Preferences and Value Trade-Offs , 1977, IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics.

[23]  A. Tversky,et al.  Preference and belief: Ambiguity and competence in choice under uncertainty , 1991 .

[24]  Charles Vlek,et al.  Utility, Probability, and Human Decision Making , 1975 .

[25]  E. Weber,et al.  Perceived risk attitudes: relating risk perception to risky choice , 1997 .

[26]  D. Kahneman,et al.  Timid choices and bold forecasts: a cognitive perspective on risk taking , 1993 .

[27]  Peter M. Todd,et al.  Fast and frugal heuristics for environmentally bounded minds , 2001 .

[28]  Jonathan Baron,et al.  Ambiguity and rationality , 1988 .

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

[30]  L Sjöberg,et al.  Worry and Risk Perception , 1998, Risk analysis : an official publication of the Society for Risk Analysis.

[31]  Avishai Henik,et al.  SUPPRESSION SITUATIONS IN PSYCHOLOGICAL RESEARCH : DEFINITIONS, IMPLICATIONS, AND APPLICATIONS , 1991 .

[32]  Lola L. Lopes,et al.  [Advances in Experimental Social Psychology] Advances in Experimental Social Psychology Volume 20 Volume 20 || Between Hope and Fear: The Psychology of Risk , 1987 .

[33]  Kip Smith,et al.  Neuronal substrates for choice under ambiguity, risk, gains, and losses , 2001, NeuroImage.

[34]  David Laibson,et al.  Commentary on “Choice Bracketing” by Read, Loewenstein and Rabin , 1999 .

[35]  D. Kahneman.  A perspective on judgment and choice: mapping bounded rationality. , 2003, The American psychologist.

[36]  J. Potters,et al.  An experiment on risk taking and evaluation periods , 1997 .

[37]  S. Fiske,et al.  The Handbook of Social Psychology , 1935 .

[38]  R. Thaler,et al.  Risk Aversion Or Myopia? Choices in Repeated Gambles and Retirement Investments , 1999 .

[39]  M. Rabin.  Risk Aversion and Expected Utility Theory: A Calibration Theorem , 2000 .

[40]  Colin Camerer.  Prospect Theory In The Wild: Evidence From The Field , 1998 .

[41]  A. Tversky,et al.  Choices, Values, and Frames , 2000 .

[42]  Howard Kunreuther,et al.  Risk, ambiguity, and insurance , 1989 .

[43]  Alexander Pollatsek,et al.  A theory of risk , 1970 .

[44]  S. West,et al.  Statistical issues in the study of temporal data: daily experiences. , 1991, Journal of personality.

[45]  D. Ellsberg.  Decision, probability, and utility: Risk, ambiguity, and the Savage axioms , 1961 .

[46]  John A. Aloysius.  Ambiguity aversion and the equity premium puzzle: A re-examination of experimental data on repeated gambles , 2005 .

[47]  Daniel Read,et al.  Choice Bracketing , 1999 .

[48]  H. Bandemer.  Savage, L. J.: Foundations of Statistics. Dover Publ., Inc,. New York 1972. 310 S. , 1974 .

[49]  L. J. Savage,et al.  The Foundations of Statistics , 1955 .

[50]  G. Keren.  The Explanatory Power of Choice Bracketing: A Commentary on Read et al., “Choice Bracketing” , 1999 .

[51]  Robert F. DeVellis,et al.  Scale Development: Theory and Applications. , 1992 .

[52]  F. B. Vernadat,et al.  Decisions with Multiple Objectives: Preferences and Value Tradeoffs , 1994 .

[53]  Colin Camerer,et al.  Recent developments in modeling preferences: Uncertainty and ambiguity , 1992 .

[54]  Timothy D. Wilson,et al.  Mental contamination and mental correction: unwanted influences on judgments and evaluations. , 1994, Psychological bulletin.

[55]  R. Hogarth,et al.  Decision Making under Ambiguity , 1986 .

[56]  Craig R. Fox,et al.  Ambiguity Aversion, Comparative Ignorance, and Decision Context , 2002 .

[57]  Colin Camerer,et al.  Behavioral Economics: Past, Present, Future , 2003 .

[58]  R. Mehra,et al.  THE EQUITY PREMIUM A Puzzle , 1985 .

[59]  E. Weber,et al.  A Domain-Specific Risk-Attitude Scale: Measuring Risk Perceptions and Risk Behaviors , 2002 .

[60]  Harry V. Roberts,et al.  Risk, Ambiguity, and the Savage Axioms: Comment , 1963 .

[61]  Martin Weber,et al.  Judged knowledge and ambiguity aversion , 1995 .

[62]  R. Abrams,et al.  Psychological sources of ambiguity avoidance , 1986 .

[63]  Colin Camerer,et al.  Advances in behavioral economics , 2004 .

[64]  A. Maffioletti,et al.  Attitudes to risk and attitudes to uncertainty: experimental evidence , 2004 .

[65]  C. Fornell,et al.  Evaluating Structural Equation Models with Unobservable Variables and Measurement Error , 1981 .

[66]  J. Yates.  Risk-taking behavior , 1992 .

[67]  Lindsley G. Boiney.  The Effects of Skewed Probability on Decision Making under Ambiguity , 1993 .

[68]  John C. Butler,et al.  Measures of Perceived Risk , 1999 .

[69]  Martin Weber,et al.  Prospect Theory, Mental Accounting, and Differences in Aggregated and Segregated Evaluation of Lottery Portfolios , 2001, Manag. Sci..

[70]  James C. Anderson,et al.  STRUCTURAL EQUATION MODELING IN PRACTICE: A REVIEW AND RECOMMENDED TWO-STEP APPROACH , 1988 .

[71]  I. Levin,et al.  Relating individual differences in attitude toward ambiguity to risky choices , 2001 .

[72]  A. Tversky,et al.  The Effect of Myopia and Loss Aversion on Risk Taking: An Experimental Test , 1997 .

[73]  Christopher K. Hsee,et al.  Risk as Feelings , 2001, Psychological bulletin.

[74]  P. Glimcher.  decisions, uncertainty and the brain , 2003 .

[75]  Daniel Kahneman,et al.  Availability: A heuristic for judging frequency and probability , 1973 .

[76]  D. Bernoulli.  Exposition of a New Theory on the Measurement of Risk , 1954 .

[77]  Robin M. Hogarth,et al.  Decision Time as a Function of Task Complexity , 1975 .

[78]  L. Macchi,et al.  Thinking : psychological perspectives on reasoning, judgment and decision making , 2005 .

[79]  R. Thaler,et al.  Myopic Loss Aversion and the Equity Premium Puzzle , 1993 .

[80]  Ralph L. Keeney,et al.  Wise choices : decisions, games, and negotiations , 1996 .