ArticlePsychonomic bulletin & review2023
Loss aversion in the control of attention.
Article in Psychonomic bulletin & review, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Neural correlates of altered loss aversion in alcohol use disorder: preliminary evidence of sex-related differences from 18F-FDG-PET imaging.Frontiers in psychiatry · 2026Article
- Strategies for enhancing home-based cardiac rehabilitation self-management for patients with coronary heart disease: a qualitative study.BMC nursing · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Loss aversion is a psychological bias where an increase in loss is perceived as being larger than an equivalent increase in gain. In the present study, two experiments were conducted to explore whether attentional control reflects loss aversion. Participants performed a visual search task. On each trial, a red target and a green target were presented simultaneously, and participants were free to search for either one. Participants always gained points when they searched for a gain color target (e.g., red). However, they gained or lost points when they searched for a gain-loss color target (e.g., green). In Experiment 1, the expected values of the gain color and the gain-loss color were equal. Therefore, for maximizing the reward, participants did not need to preferably search for a particular color. However, results showed that participants searched for the gain color target more than the gain-loss color target, suggesting stronger attentional control for the gain color than the gain-loss color. In Experiment 2, even though the expected value of the gain-loss color was greater than that of the gain color, attention was allocated to the gain color more than to the gain-loss color. The results imply that attentional control can operate in accordance with the loss aversion principle when the boundary conditions for loss aversion in a repeated binary decision-making task were met.
Indexed as
Identifiers
37040019What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.