The effect on the preference-reversal phenomenon of using choice indifferences

Abstract Preference reversal appears to be non-transitive choice behavior, inasmuch as subjects choosing between two gambles with similar expected values typically select the one with a larger chance of winning (a P-bet), yet they place a higher certainty equivalent, or judged indifference point (JIP), on the one with the larger amount to win (the $-bet). In the present experiments, we explore a pair of methods for determining money indifference points that are procedurally closer than is common in this research to the choice phase of the preference reversal experiment. The two new approaches for determining money indifference points for gambles (called choice indifference points, or CIP) are as follows: a version of the classical psychophysical up-down method and a variant called PEST (i.e., Parameter Estimation by Sequential Testing). With both methods, CIPs reduced the number of reversals, as compared to JIPs, to the point with PEST that the remaining ones may be due primarily to chance fluctuations in choices between gambles. Subjects who reversed frequently usually judged the gambles to have similar values; those who did not reverse at all, judged them as different. The typical subjects exhibits JIP>CIP for $-bets, but not for P-bets. This bias appears to underlie the observed intransitivity when JIP is used.

[1]  Joel S. Warm,et al.  Psychology of Perception , 1957 .

[2]  H. J. Einhorn,et al.  Expression theory and the preference reversal phenomena. , 1987 .

[3]  Von Håkan R. Gadolin.  Zur Pathologie und Klinik der Petrositis , 1947 .

[4]  G. Barrie Wetherill,et al.  Sequential Methods in Statistics. 2nd Edition. , 1977 .

[5]  R. Hamm.  The Conditions of Occurrence of the Preference Reversal Phenomenon , 1979 .

[6]  R. Duncan Luce,et al.  Rank-dependent, subjective expected-utility representations , 1988 .

[7]  C. Plott,et al.  Economic Theory of Choice and the Preference Reversal Phenomenon , 1979 .

[8]  Georg v. Békésy,et al.  A New Audiometer , 1947 .

[9]  H. Lindman.  Inconsistent preferences among gambles. , 1971 .

[10]  J. Quiggin.  A theory of anticipated utility , 1982 .

[11]  J. Pedoe,et al.  Sequential Methods in Statistics , 1966 .

[12]  Edi Karni,et al.  Preference reversal and the observability of preferences by experimental methods , 1987 .

[13]  R. Sugden,et al.  A Rationale for Preference Reversal , 1983 .

[14]  A. Tversky,et al.  The Causes of Preference Reversal , 1990 .

[15]  M. P. Friedman,et al.  HANDBOOK OF PERCEPTION , 1977 .

[16]  Louis Narens,et al.  Classification of concatenation measurement structures according to scale type , 1985 .

[17]  Robert J. Reilly,et al.  Preference Reversal: Further Evidence and Some Suggested Modifications in Experimental Design , 1982 .

[18]  J. Gentry,et al.  Investigation of the preference-reversal phenomenon in a new product introduction task , 1980 .

[19]  A. Tversky,et al.  Contingent weighting in judgment and choice , 1988 .

[20]  R. Duncan Luce,et al.  Chapter 9 – DETECTION, DISCRIMINATION, AND RECOGNITION* , 1974 .

[21]  G. B. Wetherill,et al.  Sequential Methods in Statistics. , 1972 .

[22]  Effect of pricing conditions on preference reversals by business students and managers , 1984 .

[23]  Friedrich Schneider,et al.  Economic Theory of Choice and the Preference Reversal Phenomenon: A Reexamination , 1982 .

[24]  Paul Slovic,et al.  Response-induced reversals of preference in gambling: An extended replication in las vegas , 1973 .

[25]  M. Yaari.  The Dual Theory of Choice under Risk , 1987 .

[26]  P. Slovic,et al.  Reversals of preference between bids and choices in gambling decisions. , 1971 .