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

What problem does this paper attempt to address?

The problem that this paper attempts to solve is to re - examine and verify the "Disjunction Effect" discovered by Tversky and Shafir (1992). Specifically, Tversky and Shafir (1992) found in their study that when people face uncertain results, their decision - making behaviors are significantly different from those in certain situations, which violates the "Sure - Thing Principle" in the rational choice theory. To further explore this phenomenon, the paper makes the following attempts:

1. **Direct Replication**: The paper first directly replicated the experiment of Tversky and Shafir (1992), using a large - scale sample (N = 890) and recruiting participants through the Amazon Mechanical Turk (MTurk) platform.

2. **Extended Design**: In addition to direct replication, the paper also extended the experimental design and compared the effects of between - subject design and within - subject design. Between - subject design means that different groups of participants receive different experimental conditions, while within - subject design means that the same group of participants experiences all experimental conditions.

3. **Specific Experimental Paradigms**:
- **"Paying to Know"**: Participants were informed that they had just taken an exam but did not know the results. Then they faced a choice of whether to pay $5 to reserve the right to purchase a low - price vacation package in the future. This experiment aimed to examine how uncertainty affects people's decision - making.
- **"Choice Under Risk"**: Participants were informed that they had just gambled, with a 50% chance of winning or losing, and then they faced whether to accept a second identical gamble. This experiment aimed to examine how uncertainty affects people's acceptance of risk.

4. **Statistical Analysis**: The paper used a variety of statistical methods to analyze data, including Chi - square test, McNemar test, Friedman test and Durbin - Conover comparison, etc., to ensure the reliability and validity of the results.

Through these methods, the paper aims to verify the existence of the "Disjunction Effect" and explore the influence of different experimental designs (between - subject vs. within - subject) on this effect. Ultimately, the paper hopes to provide new insights into judgment and decision - making theories and promote the improvement of statistical understanding of between - subject and within - subject designs.