共查询到20条相似文献,搜索用时 0 毫秒
1.
“投资者难以长远地将多重投资看作整体,而更倾向于分割成单一决策进而表现出每次决策风险规避的现象”被称为风险投资中的短视效应.短视/远视风险投资常通过单一决策/重复决策范式予以研究.大多数的研究发现,在单一决策条件下,投资者接受投资的人数比例或者投资金额低于重复决策条件.短视效应的调节机制有反馈频率、投资灵活性、选择组块、风险状况等.研究者分别提出短视损失厌恶(myopic loss aversion,简称MLA)理论和短视预期理论(myopic prospect theory,MPT)对短视现象进行解释;但这些理论受到基于齐当别理论(equate-to-differentiate theory)研究的挑战.文章在总结短视效应已有相关研究的基础上指出今后有必要深入探索的方向. 相似文献
2.
预期理论基于对期望效用理论的批判与发展,提出了价值函数与权重函数,对以往风险决策研究中所发现的现象进行了很好的预测与解释。预期理论的核心概念包括参照依赖、损失规避与权重函数。基于预期理论的一些决策偏差包括框架效应、禀赋效应和默认偏差也部分揭示了与人们风险决策有关的脑区。近年来,通过采用功能性核磁共振等脑成像手段对预期理论的一些核心成分进行的研究表明,涉及到人们风险决策的脑区主要有前额叶、纹状体、脑岛与杏仁核。未来的研究可以从预期理论的产生根源、个体发展以及遗传基因等角度进行进一步的探讨。 相似文献
3.
4.
5.
Based on the literature on the relationship between culture, emotion, and loss aversion, we derive that culture can influence the degree of loss aversion. To test our hypotheses, we conduct a standardized survey in 53 countries worldwide that includes the questions from the Hofstede survey on cultural dimensions as well as lottery questions on loss aversion. The results show that individualism, power distance, and masculinity increase loss aversion as predicted, whereas the impact of uncertainty avoidance is less significant. Moreover, we also find a relation between the distribution of major religions in a country and loss aversion. In comparison, the connection of loss aversion to macroeconomic variables seems to be much smaller. Copyright © 2016 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. 相似文献
6.
关于成本沉没效应的实验研究 总被引:2,自引:0,他引:2
运用IAT 技术,通过实验,证明“损失厌恶”具有内隐性,“损失厌恶”存在内隐偏差,并且二者具有很强的稳定性,即不受当前情绪及刺激材料性质等的影响,为进一步认识成本沉没效应等现象的本质特点提供了证据。 相似文献
7.
The Prospects for Prospect Theory: An Empirical Evaluation of International Relations Applications of Framing and Loss Aversion 总被引:1,自引:0,他引:1
William A. Boettcher III 《Political psychology》2004,25(3):331-362
International relations theorists have tried to adapt prospect theory to make it relevant to the study of real-world decision-making and testable beyond the constraints of the laboratory. Three experiments with undergraduate samples were conducted in an effort to clarify the advantages and limitations of prospect theory as adapted to explain political behavior. The first experiment tested hypotheses regarding the impact of prospect framing on group polarization, but these were only weakly supported. The second and third experiments examined alternative adaptations of the concept of framing; the results suggest that the political science expansion of the concept of framing may, under certain conditions, produce clear and robust preference reversals. 相似文献
8.
近年来,贫富差距的不断加大已引起民众较为强烈的收入不公平感,而导致收入不公平感产生的一个主要原因是人们对自己收入所得不如他人的相对比较。本项目基于预期理论价值函数的参照依赖和损失规避双视角,对当前民众收入不公平感的形成机制与管理对策进行系列实证研究;采用心理测量、实验室实验和干预研究相结合的方法,并借助神经电生理的ERP技术和心理生理学的多导生理记录仪(SCR),以检验民众收入不公平感的自我-他人参照、单参照点-多参照点比较的整合性参照依赖框架;探索损失规避对多得不均等和少得不均等的非对称不公平感的根源性作用和神经生理机制;选取社区居民,操纵参照对象、参照点和得失框架,进行多轮次和多变量的干预研究,以探索减少民众收入不公平感的应对策略,并据此提出切实有效的管理对策。 相似文献
9.
默认效应指的是当存在默认选项时, 人们决策时倾向于保留默认选项而不做出改变的一种现象。这种现象广泛存在于器官捐献政策、退休金储蓄计划和消费决策等领域并在这些领域中有巨大的应用价值。目前, 研究者主要从损失规避、质询理论、暗含的推荐和神经心理机制四个方面解释默认效应的形成机制。默认效应还受到努力成本、默认选项的框架和个人经验等因素影响。未来的研究可以从深入探讨默认效应的产生根源、加强其跨文化研究以及拓展其应用领域这三个方面来展开。 相似文献
10.
Power Politics and the Balance of Risk: Hypotheses on Great Power Intervention in the Periphery 总被引:2,自引:0,他引:2
Jeffrey W. Taliaferro 《Political psychology》2004,25(2):177-211
Great powers frequently initiate risky diplomatic and military interventions in the periphery—regions that do not directly threaten the security of a great power's homeland. Such risky interventions are driven by leaders' aversion to losses in their state's relative power, international status, or prestige. These leaders often persist in such courses of action even when they incur mounting political, economic, and military costs. More surprisingly, they undertake risky strategies toward other great powers in an effort to continue these failing interventions. Hypotheses concerning such interventions are derived from the prospect theory and defensive realist literatures. 相似文献
11.
理查德·塞勒(Richard H. Thaler)是行为金融学的主要创建者。全文按照行为金融学的发展脉络, 在简单介绍了行为金融学诞生的前提条件及理论基础之后, 详细介绍了塞勒等学者关于股票的输家-赢家效应、封闭式基金之谜以及股权溢价之谜的实证研究及其理论观点, 展示了塞勒等学者如何巧妙地以真实金融市场上的产品以及投资者的行为为样本, 通过对这些数据的挖掘、提炼以及模拟, 揭示出投资者的信念、情绪等心理因素是导致上述金融“异象”的主要原因。对这些现象的研究, 使得塞勒脱离了传统金融学研究的窠臼, 倡导了金融学研究中关注个体行为及心理因素的研究取向, 促成了行为金融学的发展与壮大。 相似文献
12.
行为经济学中的损失规避 总被引:3,自引:0,他引:3
损失规避是指,人们总是强烈倾向于规避损失:一定数额的损失所引起的心理感受,其强烈程度约相当于两倍数额的获益感受。这种强烈的心理与行为倾向广泛存在于风险与非风险领域,在该两个领域中损失规避的研究范式也不同。损失规避常见于经济和消费等领域,可用于解释行为决策中有悖于规范化理论的诸多现象,如禀赋效应、现状偏差、股权溢价之迷和赢者的诅咒等。然而,损失规避的机制研究还存在许多尚未解决的问题,如损失规避的本质以及适用条件。今后的研究不仅要注重认知角度和情感依恋,还要结合认知过程来研究损失规避的性质和内在机制,以期帮助人们认识、预测及干预由损失规避造成的经济损失和非理性决策。 相似文献
13.
Previous studies show that decision makers (DMs) lie more to avoid a loss than achieve a gain. Two compelling mechanisms might explain this observation. One assumes that lying is a risky activity and relates to the shape of the monetary value function described by prospect theory, which assumes (a) increased risk taking for loss frames and (b) an asymmetry between the perceived values of losses and gains. The other relates to the importance of self-esteem functions as expressed in self-concept maintenance models, self-esteem issues being weighed against monetary issues. This alternative explanation assumes that a loss frame serves as a factor lowering moral considerations. We report an experimental study presenting sets of lotteries to DMs, once in a moral context and once in a traditional probabilistic context. The results show that DMs take less risk when lotteries are presented in a moral context. It is also shown that DMs take more risk for losses than gains, this holding for both the moral and probabilistic contexts. This latter result suggests that loss/gain asymmetry can be completely explained by prospect theory factors, and framing makes no difference to the valuing of moral considerations. 相似文献
14.
Silberberg A Roma PG Huntsberry ME Warren-Boulton FR Sakagami T Ruggiero AM Suomi SJ 《Journal of the experimental analysis of behavior》2008,89(2):145-155
Chen, Lakshminarayanan, and Santos (2006) claim to show in three choice experiments that monkeys react rationally to price and wealth shocks, but, when faced with gambles, display hallmark, human-like biases that include loss aversion. We present three experiments with monkeys and humans consistent with a reinterpretation of their data that attributes their results not to loss aversion, but to differences between choice alternatives in delay of reinforcement. 相似文献
15.
Previous work comparing pricing decisions by buyers and sellers has primarily focused on the endowment effect, the phenomenon that selling prices exceed buying prices. Here, we examine whether pricing decisions by buyers and sellers also vary in sensitivity to differences between objects' expected values (EVs). Both a loss‐aversion account (which posits that losses are weighted more heavily than gains) and a loss‐attention account (which posits increased attention to a task when it involves possible losses) predict that pricing decisions by sellers should exhibit higher sensitivity. The latter, however, additionally predicts that this pattern should only emerge under certain conditions. In studies 1 and 2, we reanalyzed two published datasets in which participants priced monetary lotteries as sellers or buyers. It emerged that sellers showed greater EV sensitivity (defined as the rank correlation between the set price for each lottery and its EV) except in a condition with an extended deliberation time of 15 seconds. In study 3, the buyer–seller difference in EV sensitivity was replicated even when the pricing task was presented repeatedly, while in study 4, it was eliminated when buying and selling trials were randomly mixed. The reduction of the “seller's sense” in long deliberation and mixed trials settings supports an attentional resource‐based account of the differences between sellers and buyers in their EV sensitivity. Copyright © 2016 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. 相似文献
16.
Political psychologists have been quick to use prospect theory in their work, realizing its potential for explaining decisions under risk. Applying prospect theory to political decision‐making is not without problems, though, and here we address two of these: (1) Does prospect theory actually apply to political decision‐makers, or are politicians unlike the rest of us? (2) Which dimension do politicians use as their reference point when there are multiple dimensions (e.g., votes and policy)? We address both problems in an experiment with a unique sample of Dutch members of parliament as participants. We use well‐known (incentivized) decision situations and newly developed hypothetical political decision‐making scenarios. Our results indicate that politicians’ deviate from expected utility theory in the direction predicted by prospect theory but that these deviations are somewhat smaller than those of other people. Votes appear to be a more important determinant of politicians’ reference point than is policy. 相似文献
17.
This paper discusses differences between prospect theory and cumulative prospect theory. It shows that cumulative prospect theory is not merely a formal correction of some theoretical problems in prospect theory, but it also gives different predictions. Some experiments by Lola Lopes are re-analyzed, and are demonstrated to favor cumulative prospect theory over prospect theory. It turns out that the mathematical form of cumulative prospect theory is well suited for modeling the psychological phenomenon of diminishing sensitivity. © 1997 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. 相似文献
18.
19.
Gretchen B. Chapman 《决策行为杂志》1998,11(1):47-58
Previous research has shown that after decision makers are endowed with an object, they are reluctant to trade it for an alternative item. This endowment effect can be explained by loss aversion, the tendency to weight losses more heavily than gains. Consequently, there is no reluctance to trade when no true loss is involved. Four studies investigated whether reluctance to trade declines when the trade involves less of a loss—specifically, when one item is traded for another very similar item. Three experiments did not reveal a relation between willingness to trade and the similarity between the two items being traded. A fourth experiment, however, indicated that subjects were quite willing to trade for an identical item, less willing to trade for a similar item, and even less willing to trade for a dissimilar item. Thus, reluctance to trade decreased as the similarity between the endowment and the alternative increased. This result suggests that loss aversion is a function not only of the item being lost but also of the trade itself—that is, of the relation between the two items being traded. © 1998 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. 相似文献