Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-lj6df Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-17T16:25:24.508Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

3 - Reversals of Preference Between Bids and Choices in Gambling Decisions

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  05 June 2012

Sarah Lichtenstein
Affiliation:
Founder and President of Decision Research and Professor of Psychology, University of Oregon
Paul Slovic
Affiliation:
Founder and President of Decision Research and Professor of Psychology, University of Oregon
Sarah Lichtenstein
Affiliation:
Decision Research. Oregon
Paul Slovic
Affiliation:
Decision Research, Oregon
Get access

Summary

Utility theory, in one form or another, has provided the guiding principle for prescribing and describing gambling decisions since the 18th century. The expected utility principle asserts that given a choice among gambles, the decision maker will select the one with the highest expected utility.

There are a number of ways other than choosing by which an individual can express his opinions about the utilities of various gambles. Among these are ratings of attractiveness, bids to buy, and bids to sell:

  1. Ratings of attractiveness: On an arbitrary scale, S assigns an attractiveness value to each of a set of bets. For any pair, it is assumed that he prefers the one to which he gives the highest rating.

  2. Bids to buy (B bids): E owns a set of bets. For each bet, S indicates the maximum amount of money he would pay to be able to play the bet (see Coombs, Bezembinder, & Goode, 1967; Lichtenstein, 1965). For any pair of bets, it is assumed that he prefers the one for which he bids the most money.

  3. Bids to sell (S bids): S owns a set of bets. For each bet, S indicates the minimum amount for which he would sell the right to play the bet (see Becker, DeGroot, & Marschak, 1964; Coombs et al., 1967; Tversky, 1967b). For any pair it is assumed that S prefers the bet for which he demands the most money.

Because utility theory assumes that these different responses are all determined by the same underlying values, it predicts that Ss who are asked to choose one of two bets will choose the one for which they would make the higher bid or to which they would give the higher rating.

Type
Chapter
Information
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2006

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Save book to Kindle

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure coreplatform@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Available formats
×

Save book to Dropbox

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

Available formats
×

Save book to Google Drive

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

Available formats
×