zbMATH — the first resource for mathematics

Aspirations as reference points: an experimental investigation of risk behavior over time. (English) Zbl 1271.91038
Summary: This paper examines the importance of aspirations as reference points in a multi-period decision-making context. After stating their personal aspiration level, 172 individuals made six sequential decisions among risky prospects as part of a choice experiment. The results show that individuals make different risky choices in a multi-period compared to a single-period setting. In particular, individuals’ aspiration level is their main reference point during the early stages of decision making, while their starting status (wealth level at the start of the experiment) becomes the central reference point during the later stages of their multi-period decision making.

91B06 Decision theory
Full Text: DOI
[1] Ackert, L. F.; Charupat, N.; Church, B. K.; Deaves, R., An experimental examination of the house money effect in a multi-period setting, Experimental Economics, 9, 5-16, (2006) · Zbl 1132.91452
[2] Arkes, H. R.; Hirshleifer, D.; Jiang, D.; Lim, S., Reference point adaptation: tests in the domain of security trading, Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 105, 67-81, (2008)
[3] Benartzi, S.; Thaler, R., Myopic loss aversion and the equity premium puzzle, Quarterly Journal of Economics, 110, 73-92, (1995) · Zbl 0829.90040
[4] Bleichrodt, H., Reference-dependent utility with shifting reference points and incomplete preferences, Journal of Mathematical Psychology, 51, 266-276, (2007) · Zbl 1132.91367
[5] Cohen, M.; Etner, J.; Jeleva, M., Dynamic decision making when risk perception depends on past experience, Theory and Decision, 64, 173-192, (2008) · Zbl 1136.91366
[6] Dellavigna, S.; LiCalzi, M., Learning to make risk neutral choices in a symmetric world, Mathematical Social Sciences, 41, 19-37, (2001) · Zbl 1013.91064
[7] Denrell, J. (2004). Risk taking and aspiration levels: Two alternative null-models. Academy of Management Proceedings, pp.J1-J6.
[8] Diecidue, E.; Van De Ven, J., Aspiration level, probability of success and failure, and expected utility, International Economic Review, 49, 683-700, (2008)
[9] Endres, M. L., The effectiveness of assigned goals in complex financial decision making and the importance of gender, Theory and Decision, 61, 129-157, (2006) · Zbl 1184.91070
[10] Fischbacher, U., Z-tree: zurich toolbox for ready-made economic experiments, Experimental Economics, 10, 171-178, (2007)
[11] Gneezy, U.; Potters, J., An experiment on risk taking and evaluation periods, The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 112, 631-645, (1997)
[12] Gooding, R. Z.; Goel, S.; Wiseman, R. M., Fixed versus variable reference points in the risk-return relationship, Journal of Economic Behavior and Organization, 29, 331-350, (1996)
[13] Harrison, D. A.; McLaughlin, M. E.; Coalter, T. M., Context, cognition and common method variance: psychometric and verbal protocol evidence, Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 68, 246-261, (1996)
[14] Heath, C.; Larrick, R. P.; Wu, G., Goals as reference points, Cognitive Psychology, 38, 79-109, (1999)
[15] Heyman, J. E.; Mellers, B.; Tishcenko, S.; Schwartz, A., Shifting reference points and fleeting pleasures, Advances in Consumer Research, 32, 116-117, (2005)
[16] Howard, G. S., Why do people say nasty things about self-reports?, Journal of Organizational Behavior, 15, 399-404, (1994)
[17] Itami, H., Analysis of implied risk-taking behavior under a goal-based incentive scheme, Management Science, 23, 183-197, (1976) · Zbl 0365.90010
[18] Kahneman, D.; Tversky, A., Prospect theory: an analysis of decision under risk, Econometrica, 47, 263-292, (1979) · Zbl 0411.90012
[19] Lanyon R. I., Goodstein L. D. (1997) Personality Assessment (3rd ed.). Wiley, New York
[20] Lim, R. G., A range-frequency explanation of shifting reference points in risky decision making, Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 63, 6-20, (1995)
[21] Liu, H.-H.; Colman, A. M., Ambiguity aversion in the long run: repeated decisions under risk and uncertainty, Journal of Economic Psychology, 30, 277-284, (2009)
[22] Loewenstein, G., Anticipation and valuation of delayed consumption, Economic Journal, 97, 667-684, (1987)
[23] Loewenstein, G., Frames of mind in intertemporal choice, Management Science, 34, 210-214, (1988)
[24] Loewenstein, G.; Prelec, D., Negative time preference, American Economic Review, 81, 347-352, (1991)
[25] Lopes, L. L., Hope and fear: the psychology of risk, Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, 20, 255-295, (1987)
[26] Munro, A.; Sugden, R., On the theory of reference-dependent preferences, Journal of Economic Behavior and Organization, 50, 407-428, (2003)
[27] Odean, T.; Strahilevitz, M.; Barber, M. B., Once burned twice shy, this stock has been good to me so far, and it could have been worse: how naïve learning and counterfactuals influence the repurchase of stocks previously sold, Advances in Consumer Research, 32, 204, (2005)
[28] Page, L.; Garboua, L. L.; Montmarquette, C., Aspiration levels and educational choices: an experimental study, Economics of Education Review, 26, 748-758, (2007)
[29] Payne, J.; Laughhunn, D.; Crum, R., Translation of gambles and aspiration level effects in risky choice behavior, Management Science, 26, 1039-1060, (1980)
[30] Porcelli, A. J.; Delgado, M. R., Acute stress modulates risk taking in financial decision making, Psychological Science, 20, 278-283, (2009)
[31] Rachlin, H., Why do people gamble and keep gambling despite heavy losses?, Psychological Science, 1, 294-297, (1990)
[32] Samuelson, W. P.; Zeckhauser, R., Status quo bias in decision making, Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, 1, 7-59, (1988)
[33] Schmidt, U., Reference dependence in cumulative prospect theory, Journal of Mathematical Psychology, 47, 122-131, (2003) · Zbl 1040.91028
[34] Shefrin H. (2002) Beyond greed and fear: Understanding behavioral finance and the psychology of investing. Oxford University Press, Oxford.
[35] Shefrin, H.; Statman, M., Behavioral portfolio theory, Journal of Financial and Quantitative Analysis, 35, 127-151, (2000)
[36] Sugden, R., Reference-dependent subjective expected utility, Journal of Economic Theory, 11, 172-191, (2003) · Zbl 1043.91022
[37] Sullivan, K.; Kida, T., The effect of multiple reference points and prior gains and losses on managers’ risky decision making, Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 64, 76-83, (1995)
[38] Thaler, R. H.; Johnson, E. J., Gambling with the house money and trying to break even, Management Science, 36, 643-660, (1990)
[39] Tversky, A.; Kahneman, D., The framing of decisions and the psychology of choice, Science, 211, 453-458, (1981) · Zbl 1225.91017
[40] Weber, E. U.; Milliman, R. A., Perceived risk attitudes: relating risk perception to risky choice, Management Science, 43, 123-144, (1997) · Zbl 0900.90314
[41] Weber, M.; Zuchel, H., How do prior outcomes affect risk attitude? comparing escalation of commitment and the house-money effect, Decision Analysis, 2, 30-43, (2005)
[42] Zeisberger, S.; Langer, T.; Weber, M., Why does myopia decrease the willingness to invest? Is it myopic loss aversion or myopic loss probability aversion?, Theory and Decision, 72, 35-50, (2012) · Zbl 1274.91153
This reference list is based on information provided by the publisher or from digital mathematics libraries. Its items are heuristically matched to zbMATH identifiers and may contain data conversion errors. It attempts to reflect the references listed in the original paper as accurately as possible without claiming the completeness or perfect precision of the matching.