Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33004877›Full record

ArticleScientific reports2020

Deviations of rational choice: an integrative explanation of the endowment and several context effects.

Joost Kruis, Gunter Maris, Maarten Marsman, Maria Bolsinova, Han L J van der Maas

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Scientific reports, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors.

Joost KruisPsychological Methods Department, University of Amsterdam, Nieuwe Achtergracht 129B, Amsterdam, 1018WS, The Netherlands. j.kruis@uva.nl.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-8700-0326
Gunter MarisACT-Next by ACT, 500 ACT Drive, Iowa City, IA, 52245, USA.
Maarten MarsmanPsychological Methods Department, University of Amsterdam, Nieuwe Achtergracht 129B, Amsterdam, 1018WS, The Netherlands.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-5309-7502
Maria BolsinovaDepartment of Methodology and Statistics, Tilburg University, Warandelaan 2, Tilburg, 5037 AB, The Netherlands.
Han L J van der MaasPsychological Methods Department, University of Amsterdam, Nieuwe Achtergracht 129B, Amsterdam, 1018WS, The Netherlands.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-8278-319X

Funding

EPA EP-C-17-017
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

People's choices are often found to be inconsistent with the assumptions of rational choice theory. Over time, several probabilistic models have been proposed that account for such deviations from rationality. However, these models have become increasingly complex and are often limited to particular choice phenomena. Here we introduce a network approach that explains a broad set of choice phenomena. We demonstrate that this approach can be used to compare different choice theories and integrates several choice mechanisms from established models. A basic setup implements bounded rationality, loss aversion, and inhibition in a natural fashion, which allows us to predict the occurrence of well-known choice phenomena, such as the endowment effect and the similarity, attraction, compromise, and phantom context effects. Our results show that this network approach provides a simple representation of complex choice behaviour, and can be used to gain a better understanding of how the many choice phenomena and key theoretical principles from different types of decision-making are connected.

Identifiers

PMID33004877
PMCPMC7529946

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.