Inducing alternative-based and characteristic-based search procedures in risky choice

We propose a novel experimental design aimed at investigating whether inducing individuals to use certain choice procedures has an effect on the outcome of their decision. Specifically, by implementing a modification of the mouse-tracing method, we induce subjects to use either alternative-based or characteristic-based search procedures in a between-subject lottery-choice experiment. We find that encouraging subjects to search by characteristic systematically makes them choose riskier options. Consistently with existing literature, our evidence indicates that individuals typically look up information within alternatives. However, when induced to search by characteristic, high prizes receive more attention, leading individuals to switch to non-compensatory heuristics and -- consequently -- make riskier choices. Our findings are robust to variations in the complexity of the choice problem and individual differences in risk-attitudes, CRT scores, and gender.

[1]  Joseph G. Johnson,et al.  Applying the decision moving window to risky choice: Comparison of eye-tracking and mouse-tracing methods , 2011, Judgment and Decision Making.

[2]  G. Harrison,et al.  Risk Aversion in the Laboratory , 2008 .

[3]  R. Hertwig,et al.  The priority heuristic: making choices without trade-offs. , 2006, Psychological review.

[4]  E. N. A. M. Schulte-Mecklenbeck Take a quick click at that! Mouselab and eye-tracking as tools to measure intuition , 2009 .

[5]  A. Tversky Elimination by aspects: A theory of choice. , 1972 .

[6]  S. Ayal,et al.  Ignorance or integration: the cognitive processes underlying choice behavior , 2009 .

[7]  M. Birnbaum,et al.  Dimension integration: Testing models without trade-offs , 2008 .

[8]  Andreas Glöckner,et al.  An eye‐tracking study on information processing in risky decisions: Evidence for compensatory strategies based on automatic processes , 2011 .

[9]  L. Lilleholt,et al.  Cognitive ability and risk aversion: A systematic review and meta analysis , 2019, Judgment and Decision Making.

[10]  A. Tversky,et al.  The framing of decisions and the psychology of choice. , 1981, Science.

[11]  Andreas Glöckner,et al.  Cognitive models of risky choice: Parameter stability and predictive accuracy of prospect theory , 2012, Cognition.

[12]  Andreas Glöckner,et al.  The Dynamics of Decision Making in Risky Choice: An Eye-Tracking Analysis , 2012, Front. Psychology.

[13]  Paolo Crosetto,et al.  The “bomb” risk elicitation task , 2012, Journal of Risk and Uncertainty.

[14]  Eric J. Johnson,et al.  Search predicts and changes patience in intertemporal choice , 2017, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

[15]  Jennifer J. Richler,et al.  Effect size estimates: current use, calculations, and interpretation. , 2012, Journal of experimental psychology. General.

[16]  Johnnie E.V. Johnson,et al.  Risk strategy under task complexity: a multivariate analysis of behaviour in a naturalistic setting , 1998 .

[17]  Ian Krajbich,et al.  Visual fixations and the computation and comparison of value in simple choice , 2010, Nature Neuroscience.

[18]  A. Glöckner,et al.  Do People Make Decisions Under Risk Based on Ignorance? An Empirical Test of the Priority Heuristic Against Cumulative Prospect Theory , 2008 .

[19]  Shu Li,et al.  Is making a risky choice based on a weighting and adding process? An eye-tracking investigation. , 2013, Journal of experimental psychology. Learning, memory, and cognition.

[20]  J. Nelson Not-So-Strong Evidence for Gender Differences in Risk Taking , 2016 .

[21]  S. Frederick Journal of Economic Perspectives—Volume 19, Number 4—Fall 2005—Pages 25–42 Cognitive Reflection and Decision Making , 2022 .

[22]  James N. Druckman,et al.  Evaluating framing effects , 2001 .

[23]  A. Tversky,et al.  Advances in prospect theory: Cumulative representation of uncertainty , 1992 .

[24]  Jacob L. Orquin,et al.  Attention and choice: a review on eye movements in decision making. , 2013, Acta psychologica.

[25]  A. Glöckner,et al.  Multiple-reason decision making based on automatic processing. , 2008, Journal of experimental psychology. Learning, memory, and cognition.

[26]  Eric J. Johnson,et al.  The adaptive decision maker , 1993 .

[27]  A. Kühberger,et al.  The Influence of Framing on Risky Decisions: A Meta-analysis. , 1998, Organizational behavior and human decision processes.

[28]  M. Rothschild,et al.  Increasing risk: I. A definition , 1970 .

[29]  Rachel T. A. Croson,et al.  Gender Differences in Preferences , 2009 .

[30]  David Ronayne,et al.  PRICE COMPARISON WEBSITES , 2021, International Economic Review.

[31]  H. Simon,et al.  A Behavioral Model of Rational Choice , 1955 .

[32]  L. Eeckhoudt,et al.  Economic and Financial Decisions under Risk , 2005 .

[33]  Haihan Yu,et al.  Cognitive (ir)reflection: New experimental evidence☆ , 2016 .

[34]  Chris Arney Nudge: Improving Decisions about Health, Wealth, and Happiness , 2015 .