Abstract:Reports an error in "Magnitude effects in preference reversals" by Yong Lu and Marek Nieznański ( Journal of Neuroscience, Psychology, and Economics , 2021[Sep], Vol 14[3], 149-184). In the article, the authors analyzed the data by applying an inappropriate statistical methodology, the Kruskal–Wallis analysis of variance by ranks, for mixed-subjects comparisons (i.e., one sample group of 57 participants vs. another two sample groups of 39 and 41 participants) in the "The Choice Task" and "Predicted and Unpredicted PR" sections of Experiment 1. The authors reanalyzed the data by regrouping the sample groups and by applying an appropriate statistical methodology, the Wilcoxon rank sum test with continuity corrections. The results yielded the same conclusions as reported. Changes have been made in the Results section to the last paragraph under "The Choice Task" and the first paragraph under "Predicted and Unpredicted PR" to update these sections with the correct results for Experiment 1. The online version of this article has been corrected. (The following abstract of the original article appeared in record 2021-91176-003.) The finding that individual preferences are systematically inconsistent under different but formally equivalent modes of information processing is called the preference reversal (PR). The present research extended previously limited studies on magnitude effects of gains on PR by examining this effect with both gains and losses. Experiment 1 progressively manipulated the payoff variations in bet pairs to measure the effect of ratio scales on risk preferences and PR. Undergraduates (N = 137) were asked to choose a bet they prefer from a list of bet pairs, and then to evaluate the bets indicating how much they were willing to pay for a chance to participate in each of the bets. We observed a robust dichotomous pattern of choice behavior: The majority of choices are consistent with risk aversion or risk-seeking behavior when loss ratios between bet pairs are low and high, respectively. Moreover, different patterns of PR can be elicited with these loss stakes. Experiment 2 examined the predictions of three decision-making heuristics, namely a novel simplified approach called the loss-averse rule, the majority rule, and the equate-to-differentiate rule, as well as cumulative prospect theory that individuals may use in binary choice. Participants (N = 113) were asked to choose a bet from a list of bet pairs. We found that when the loss ratio is high, proportions of choices were in the direction predicted by cumulative prospect theory and the loss-averse rule of decision rather than by the other two rules, at both the conditional and aggregate levels. These results may suggest that when loss risk reaches a level of threshold, risk behavior for binary choices on lotteries is ubiquitously influenced by loss aversion. The overall results indicate the fragile, context-dependent nature of PR phenomenon. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved)

To win and lose: Linguistic aspects of prospect theory

Myopic Loss Aversion or Equate-to-differentiate Heuristic? A Heuristic Decision Making Model for Both Single and Aggregated Plays.

Riskier for Me or for Others? the Role of Domain and Probability in Self-Other Differences, in Risky Decision-Making

Research on Loss Aversion and Its Formation in Prospect Theory

Human behaviour through a LENS: How Linguistic content triggers Emotions and Norms and determines Strategy choices

Are decisions under risk malleable?

Prospect theory or construal level theory? Diminishing sensitivity vs. psychological distance in risky decisions

Prospect Theory and Foreign Policy Decision-making

Prosocial Gains and Losses: Modulations of Human Social Decision-Making by Loss-Gain Context

Am I Winning or Losing? Probing the Appraisal of Partial Wins via Response Vigor

Teaching Prospect Theory with the Deal or No Deal Game Show

Attentional priority and limbic activity favor gains over losses

Language-based game theory in the age of artificial intelligence

Correction to "Magnitude effects in preference reversals" by Lu and Nieznański (2021).

Replicating patterns of prospect theory for decision under risk

Predicting Decisions in Language Based Persuasion Games

Prospect Theory for Online Financial Trading

An agent-based model of repeated decision making under risk: modeling the role of alternate reference points and risk behavior on long-run outcomes

The Effect of Loss-Aversion on Strategic Behaviour of Players in Divergent Interest Tacit Coordination Games

Two Important Improvements of Prospect Theory——Study of the Loss Aversion Coefficient and the Reference Point

Can Language Representation Models Think in Bets?