The ratio bias phenomenon: fact or artifact?
From MaRDI portal
Publication:763344
DOI10.1007/S11238-010-9212-9zbMATH Open1274.91146OpenAlexW3125531460MaRDI QIDQ763344FDOQ763344
Ferdinand M. Vieider, Mathieu Lefebvre, Marie Claire Villeval
Publication date: 9 March 2012
Published in: Theory and Decision (Search for Journal in Brave)
Full work available at URL: https://halshs.archives-ouvertes.fr/halshs-00435956/file/0925.pdf
Recommendations
- Reconsidering the common ratio effect: the roles of compound independence, reduction, and coalescing
- Comparing ambiguous urns with different sizes
- Biased extensive measurement: the general case
- The influence of probabilities on the response mode bias in utility elicitation
- Indistinguishability of small probabilities, subproportionality, and the common ratio effect
Cites Work
- Risk, ambiguity and the Savage axioms
- A tractable method to measure utility and loss aversion under prospect theory
- Advances in prospect theory: cumulative representation of uncertainty
- Parameter-Free Elicitation of Utility and Probability Weighting Functions
- Prospect Theory: An Analysis of Decision under Risk
- An index of loss aversion
- A parametric analysis of prospect theory's functionals for the general population
- The effects of financial incentives in experiments: A review and capital-labor-production framework. (With commentaries)
- What is loss aversion?
- The effect of the background risk in a simple chance improving decision model
- Do subjects separate (or are they sophisticated)?
- On probabilities and loss aversion
- Causes of ambiguity aversion: Known versus unknown preferences
Cited In (3)
This page was built for publication: The ratio bias phenomenon: fact or artifact?
Report a bug (only for logged in users!)Click here to report a bug for this page (MaRDI item Q763344)
