scholarly journals Out of sight – out of mind? Information acquisition patterns in risky choice framing

2014 ◽  
Vol 45 (1) ◽  
pp. 21-28 ◽  
Author(s):  
Michael Schulte-Mecklenbeck ◽  
Anton Kühberger

Abstract We investigate whether risky choice framing, i.e., the preference of a sure over an equivalent risky option when choosing among gains, and the reverse when choosing among losses, depends on redundancy and density of information available in a task. Redundancy, the saliency of missing information, and density, the description of options in one or multiple chunks, was manipulated in a matrix setup presented in MouselabWeb. On the choice level we found a framing effect only in setups with non-redundant information. On the process level outcomes attracted more acquisitions than probabilities, irrespective of redundancy. A dissociation between acquisition behavior and choice calls for a critical discussion of the limits of process-tracing measures for understanding and predicting choices in decision making tasks

2021 ◽  
Vol ahead-of-print (ahead-of-print) ◽  
Author(s):  
Guy Moshe Ross

Purpose This research aims to test focus of attention effects in risky choice. Design/methodology/approach As opposed to traditional aspiration-level theory, the shifting-focus concept introduces a second reference point, the survival point, and assumes a shifting focus of attention between the two reference points. In this conceptualization, risk-taking is a function of focus of attention on the survival reference point or the aspiration-level and resources relative to the two reference points. Four randomized controlled studies tested this concept. Findings Study 1 showed that with aspiration focus the probability of choosing a risky option was higher below an aspiration-level than above it. With survival focus, the effect was reversed. Study 2 found that close to the survival reference point, the probability of choosing a risky option was higher with aspiration focus relative to survival focus. Study 3 revealed that with scarce resources the risk taken was higher with aspiration focus than with survival focus, and the scarcer the resources the stronger was the effect. Study 4 demonstrated that with aspiration focus the risk taken was higher below an aspiration-level than above it. With survival focus the effect was reversed. Originality/value In addition to providing support for the validity of the shifting focus concept, this paper elaborates on the theoretical model by providing evidence for moderation effects. Risk-taking was affected by a focus of attention on one of two reference points, and the effect was moderated by resources relative to the two focal points. An advanced model is proposed to capture the effects of focus of attention and resources on risk-taking behavior.


2016 ◽  
Vol 106 ◽  
pp. 20-38 ◽  
Author(s):  
Annika Wallin ◽  
Carita Paradis ◽  
Konstantinos V. Katsikopoulos
Keyword(s):  

2007 ◽  
Vol 125 (1) ◽  
pp. 66-84 ◽  
Author(s):  
Christof Körner ◽  
Heiner Gertzen ◽  
Clemens Bettinger ◽  
Dietrich Albert

1978 ◽  
Vol 6 (5) ◽  
pp. 554-561 ◽  
Author(s):  
John W. Payne ◽  
Myron L. Braunstein

2011 ◽  
Vol 51 (3) ◽  
pp. 248-257 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kevin T. Mahoney ◽  
Walter Buboltz ◽  
Irwin P. Levin ◽  
Dennis Doverspike ◽  
Daniel J. Svyantek

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document