This study explored the manner in which the desirability of an event influences its judged probability. Ss gave probability estimates for each of 5 events, only one of which could occur. Monetary payoffs, ranging from lose $5 to win $5, were contingent upon which event did occur. Desirability was found to bias probability estimates in a complex manner which varied systematically between Ss and between estimation trials. In general, it made estimates less reasonable. Rewards for accuracy did not reduce value biases. Instead, they encouraged ``risk-reducing pessimism.'' Individual differences were an important source of variance. Some Ss were consistently optimistic. Others were quite pessimistic.
Nathan A. Sollenberger, Stefanie Sequeira, Erika E. Forbes, Greg J. Siegle, Jennifer S. Silk, Cecile D. Ladouceur, Neal D. Ryan, Ronald E Dahl, Aaron T. Mattfeld, Dana L. McMakin
Akihiro Tobe, Niels van Royen, I Amat-Santos, M Hudec, M Bunc, Alexander Ijsselmuiden, José L. Pomar, Liesbeth Rosseel, Amr Gamal, Javaid Iqbal, Alan Soo, Scot Garg, Udita Chandra, Ashokkumar Thakkar, P Smits, Marie-Claude Morice, Yoshinobu Onuma, A Baumbach, Patrick W. Serruys
Evan Shlofmitz, Philippe Généreux, Shmuel Chen, Ovidiu Dressler, Ori Ben‐Yehuda, Marie-Claude Morice, John D. Puskas, David P. Taggart, David E. Kandzari, Aaron Crowley, Björn Redfors, Ghazaleh Mehdipoor, A. Pieter Kappetein, Joseph F. Sabik, Patrick W. Serruys, Gregg W. Stone
Discussion(0)
No comments yet. Be the first to comment.