Investment attitude and framing effects on risky decisions

Framing effects and risky decisions in starlings.

Animals are predominantly risk prone toward reward delays and risk averse toward reward amounts. Humans in turn tend to be risk-seeking for losses and risk averse for gains. To explain the human results, Prospect Theory postulates a convex utility for losses and concave utility for gains. In contrast, Scalar Utility Theory (SUT) explains the animal data by postulating that the cognitive represe...

Attribute Framing and Goal Framing Effects in Health Decisions.

Levin, Schneider, and Gaeth (LSG, 1998) have distinguished among three types of framing-risky choice, attribute, and goal framing-to reconcile conflicting findings in the literature. In the research reported here, we focus on attribute and goal framing. LSG propose that positive frames should be more effective than negative frames in the context of attribute framing, and negative frames should ...

Framing Information Security Budget Requests to Influence Investment Decisions

Risky investment decisions: How are individuals influenced by their groups?

We investigate the effect of group versus individual decision-making in the context of risky investment decisions in which all subjects are fully informed of the probabilities and payoffs. Although there is full information, the lottery choices pose cognitive challenges so that people may not be sure of their expected utility-maximizing choice. Making such decisions in a group context provides ...

Risky Theories — The Effects of Variance on Foraging Decisions 1

SYNOPSIS This paper concerns the response of foraging animals to variability in rate of gain, or risk. Both the empirical and theoretical literatures relevant to this issue are reviewed. The methodology and results from fifty-nine studies in which animals are required to choose between foraging options differing in the variances in the rate of gain available are tabulated. We found that when ri...