Preference reversals in decision making under risk are accompanied by changes in attention to different attributes

作者: Betty E. Kim , Darryl Seligman , Joseph W. Kable

DOI: 10.3389/FNINS.2012.00109

关键词:

摘要: Recent work has shown that visual fixations reflect and influence trial-to-trial variability in people’s preferences between goods. Here we extend this principle to attribute weights during decision making under risk. We measured eye movements while people chose two risky gambles or bid on a single gamble. Consistent with previous work, found exhibited systematic preference reversals choices bids. For matched expected value, systematically the higher-probability option but provided higher for offered greater amount win. This effect was accompanied by shift of attributes, fixating probabilities more amounts Our results suggest construction value risk depends task context partly because differentially directs attention at versus amounts. Since recent demonstrates neural correlates vary fixations, our also testable hypotheses regarding how modulates computation generate reversals.

参考文章(26)
Ruey-Ling Chu, Yun-Peng Chu, The Subsidence of Preference Reversals in Simplified and Marketlike Experimental Settings: A Note The American Economic Review. ,vol. 80, pp. 902- 911 ,(1990)
David M. Grether, Charles R. Plott, Economic Theory of Choice and the Preference Reversal Phenomenon The Construction of Preference. ,vol. 69, pp. 77- 94 ,(1979) , 10.1017/CBO9780511618031.006
Amos Tversky, Paul Slovic, Daniel Kahneman, The Causes of Preference Reversal The Construction of Preference. ,vol. 80, pp. 146- 162 ,(1990) , 10.1017/CBO9780511618031.009
Joseph G. Johnson, Jerome R. Busemeyer, A dynamic, stochastic, computational model of preference reversal phenomena. Psychological Review. ,vol. 112, pp. 841- 861 ,(2005) , 10.1037/0033-295X.112.4.841
William M. Goldstein, Hillel J. Einhorn, Expression theory and the preference reversal phenomena Psychological Review. ,vol. 94, pp. 236- 254 ,(1987) , 10.1037/0033-295X.94.2.236
Joseph W. Kable, Paul W. Glimcher, The Neurobiology of Decision: Consensus and Controversy Neuron. ,vol. 63, pp. 733- 745 ,(2009) , 10.1016/J.NEURON.2009.09.003
Sarah Lichtenstein, Paul Slovic, Response-induced reversals of preference in gambling: An extended replication in Las Vegas. Journal of Experimental Psychology. ,vol. 101, pp. 16- 20 ,(1973) , 10.1037/H0035472
Eric J Johnson, John W Payne, James R Bettman, Information displays and preference reversals Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes. ,vol. 42, pp. 1- 21 ,(1988) , 10.1016/0749-5978(88)90017-9
Paul Slovic, B Fischhoff, S Lichtenstein, Contingent weighting in judgment and choice Psychological Review. ,vol. 95, pp. 371- 384 ,(1988) , 10.1037/0033-295X.95.3.371
S.-L. Lim, J. P. O'Doherty, A. Rangel, The decision value computations in the vmPFC and striatum use a relative value code that is guided by visual attention. The Journal of Neuroscience. ,vol. 31, pp. 13214- 13223 ,(2011) , 10.1523/JNEUROSCI.1246-11.2011