Replication: Revisiting Tversky and Shafir’s (1992) Disjunction Effect with an extension comparing between and within subject designs
Ignazio Ziano,Man Fai Kong,Hong Joo Kim,Chit Yu Liu,Sze Chai Wong,Bo Ley Cheng,Gilad Feldman
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joep.2020.102350
IF: 3
2021-03-01
Journal of Economic Psychology
Abstract:<p>Does uncertainty about an outcome influence decisions? The sure-thing principle (<a class="workspace-trigger" href="#b0075">Savage, 1954</a>) posits that it should not, but <a class="workspace-trigger" href="#b0105">Tversky and Shafir (1992)</a> found that people regularly violate it in hypothetical gambling and vacation decisions, a phenomenon they termed "disjunction effect". Very close replications and extensions of <a class="workspace-trigger" href="#b0105">Tversky and Shafir (1992)</a> were conducted in this paper (<em>N</em> = 890, MTurk). The target article demonstrated the effect using two paradigms in a between-subject design: here, an extension also testing a within-subject design, with design being randomly assigned was added. These results were consistent with the original findings for the "paying to know" problem (original: Cramer's V = .22, 95% (CI) [.14, .32]; replication: Cramer's V = .30, 95% CI [.24, .37]), yet not for the "choice under risk" problem (original: Cramer's V = .26, 95% CI [.14, .39]; replication: Cramer's V = .11, 95% CI [-.07, .20]). The within-subject extension showed very similar results. Implications for the disjunction effect and judgment and decision-making theory are discussed, and a call for improvements on the statistical understanding of comparisons of between-subject and within-subject designs is introduced. All materials, data, and code are available on <a href="https://osf.io/gu58m/"><em>https://osf.io/gu58m/</em></a>.</p>
economics,psychology, multidisciplinary