IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pone00/0098996.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Outcome Probability versus Magnitude: When Waiting Benefits One at the Cost of the Other

Author

Listed:
  • Michael E Young
  • Tara L Webb
  • Jillian M Rung
  • Anthony W McCoy

Abstract

Using a continuous impulsivity and risk platform (CIRP) that was constructed using a video game engine, choice was assessed under conditions in which waiting produced a continuously increasing probability of an outcome with a continuously decreasing magnitude (Experiment 1) or a continuously increasing magnitude of an outcome with a continuously decreasing probability (Experiment 2). Performance in both experiments reflected a greater desire for a higher probability even though the corresponding wait times produced substantive decreases in overall performance. These tendencies are considered to principally reflect hyperbolic discounting of probability, power discounting of magnitude, and the mathematical consequences of different response rates. Behavior in the CIRP is compared and contrasted with that in the Balloon Analogue Risk Task (BART).

Suggested Citation

  • Michael E Young & Tara L Webb & Jillian M Rung & Anthony W McCoy, 2014. "Outcome Probability versus Magnitude: When Waiting Benefits One at the Cost of the Other," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 9(6), pages 1-7, June.
    • Handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0098996
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0098996
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0098996
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0098996&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pone.0098996?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Daniel Kahneman & Amos Tversky, 2013. "Prospect Theory: An Analysis of Decision Under Risk," World Scientific Book Chapters, in: Leonard C MacLean & William T Ziemba (ed.), HANDBOOK OF THE FUNDAMENTALS OF FINANCIAL DECISION MAKING Part I, chapter 6, pages 99-127, World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd..
    2. George F. Loewenstein, 1988. "Frames of Mind in Intertemporal Choice," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 34(2), pages 200-214, February.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Uri Ben-Zion & Jan Pieter Krahnen & TAL SHAVIT, 2007. "Subjective Evaluation Of Delayed Risky Outcomes: An Experimental Approach," Working Papers 0709, Ben-Gurion University of the Negev, Department of Economics.
    2. Faralla, Valeria & Novarese, Marco & Ardizzone, Antonella, 2017. "Framing Effects in Intertemporal Choice: A Nudge Experiment," MPRA Paper 82086, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    3. repec:cup:judgdm:v:17:y:2022:i:5:p:988-1014 is not listed on IDEAS
    4. Arvid Hoffmann & Sam Henry & Nikos Kalogeras, 2013. "Aspirations as reference points: an experimental investigation of risk behavior over time," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 75(2), pages 193-210, August.
    5. Stefan A Lipman & Arthur E Attema, 2020. "Good things come to those who wait—Decreasing impatience for health gains and losses," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 15(3), pages 1-15, March.
    6. Ashish Pandey, 2021. "Reference Prices and Turnover: Evidence from Small-Capitalization Stocks," JRFM, MDPI, vol. 14(1), pages 1-14, January.
    7. Katharina Dowling & Daniel Guhl & Daniel Klapper & Martin Spann & Lucas Stich & Narine Yegoryan, 2020. "Behavioral biases in marketing," Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, Springer, vol. 48(3), pages 449-477, May.
    8. Ola Andersson & Jim Ingebretsen Carlson & Erik Wengström, 2021. "Differences Attract: An Experimental Study of Focusing in Economic Choice," The Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 131(639), pages 2671-2692.
    9. repec:jdm:journl:v:17:y:2022:i:5:p:988-1014 is not listed on IDEAS
    10. Karlsson, Niklas & Garling, Tommy & Selart, Marcus, 2024. "Effects of mental accounting on intertemporal choice," SocArXiv 2gne9_v1, Center for Open Science.
    11. George I. Christopoulos & Xiao-Xiao Liu & Ying-yi Hong, 2017. "Toward an Understanding of Dynamic Moral Decision Making: Model-Free and Model-Based Learning," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 144(4), pages 699-715, September.
    12. Zhihua Li & Songfa Zhong, 2023. "Reference Dependence in Intertemporal Preference," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 69(1), pages 475-490, January.
    13. Knetsch, Jack L., 2007. "Biased valuations, damage assessments, and policy choices: The choice of measure matters," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 63(4), pages 684-689, September.
    14. Levy, Haim & Levy, Moshe, 2002. "Experimental test of the prospect theory value function: A stochastic dominance approach," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 89(2), pages 1058-1081, November.
    15. Scholten, Marc & Read, Daniel, 2006. "Beyond discounting: the tradeoff model of intertemporal choice," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 22710, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    16. Guyse, Jeffery L. & Keller, L. Robin & Eppel, Thomas, 2002. "Valuing Environmental Outcomes: Preferences for Constant or Improving Sequences," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 87(2), pages 253-277, March.
    17. Manzini, Paola & Mariotti, Marco, 2007. "Choice Over Time," IZA Discussion Papers 2993, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    18. Heribert Gierl & Roland Helm & Stefan Stumpp, 2001. "Wertfunktion der Prospect-Theorie, Produktpräferenzen und Folgerungen für das Marketing," Schmalenbach Journal of Business Research, Springer, vol. 53(6), pages 559-588, September.
    19. Okhuysen, Gerardo A. & Galinsky, Adam D. & Uptigrove, Tamara A., 2003. "Saving the worst for last: The effect of time horizon on the efficiency of negotiating benefits and burdens," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 91(2), pages 269-279, July.
    20. Gowdy, John M., 2007. "Toward an experimental foundation for benefit-cost analysis," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 63(4), pages 649-655, September.
    21. Ali al-Nowaihi & Sanjit Dhami, 2013. "Foundations and Properties of Time Discount Functions," Discussion Papers in Economics 13/27, Division of Economics, School of Business, University of Leicester.
    22. Arthur E. Attema & Zhihua Li, 2024. "Reference-dependent discounting," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 69(1), pages 57-83, August.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0098996. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: plosone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.