Thinking styles and risky decision‐making
Further exploration of the affect–probability weighting link
Bibliographic Data
| ID | 12165751 |
|---|---|
| Authors | K Mukherjee (0000-0003-3281-3391, INSEAD, corresponding author) |
| Year | 2010 |
| Volume | 24 |
| Issue | 5 |
| Pages | 443-455 |
| Publication date | 2010-05-31 |
| Peer Reviewed | Yes |
| Open Access | Yes |
| Type | ARTICLE |
| Venue | Journal of Behavioral Decision Making (JOURNAL) |
| Journal identifiers | ISSN: 0894-3257 • E-ISSN: 1099-0771 |
| Publisher | Wiley (PUBLISHER • GB) |
| DOI | 10.1002/bdm.700 |
| OpenAlex | W2104465139 |
| Language | EN |
| Citations received | 4 |
| References cited | 36 |
People usually overweight small probabilities and underweight large probabilities leading to the familiar inverse S‐shaped weighting function. This research explores the link between affect and the structure of probability weighting from the perspective of thinking dispositions, a concept central to dual system theories of reasoning. The effects of affective priming and cognitive load on both probability weighting and the value function are also examined. The evidence suggests that thinking styles do have predictive implications for risky decision‐making. Participants with a more affective thinking style tend to be more risk‐seeking in small probability gambles. However, increasing access to the affective system by affective priming or cognitive load manipulations tend to reduce risk‐seeking behavior in small probability gambles as well as reduce risk averse behavior in large probability gambles. Previous research, manipulating the affective nature of lottery outcomes, found evidence for an increase in curvature (more overweighting of small probabilities and more underweighting of large probabilities) of the weighting function for affect‐rich outcomes, lending support to a hope‐and‐fear deconstruction of probability weighting. The present research suggests that increased anticipatory emotions characterized by the elevation of the weighting function (more overweighting at all probabilities) is also important and could sometimes be more significant than hope‐and‐fear in decision‐making under risk. An integrated approach incorporating the impact of affect on all three, the elevation and curvature of probability weighting as well as the curvature of the value function explains the empirical findings. Copyright © 2010 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd
Affect (linguistics · Cognitive psychology · Economics · Function (biology · Microeconomics · Prospect theory · Risk-seeking · Statistics · Value (mathematics · Weighting · Behavioral Health and Interventions · Communication · Decision-Making and Behavioral Economics · Forecasting Techniques and Applications · Mathematics · Psychology · Social Psychology
On the Shape of the Probability Weighting Function
Dual-Process Models in Social and Cognitive Psychology
Music, Pandas, and Muggers
The Probability Weighting Function
Cognitive‐Experiential Self‐Theory of Personality
Rational Choice and the Framing of Decisions
Curvature of the Probability Weighting Function
Weighing risk and uncertainty.
Individual differences in reasoning
Money, Kisses, and Electric Shocks
Violations of the betweenness axiom and nonlinearity in probability
Advances in prospect theory
Prospect Theory
The Affect Heuristic
The affect heuristic in judgments of risks and benefits
Integration of the cognitive and the psychodynamic unconscious
The relation of rational and experiential information processing styles to personality, basic beliefs, and the ratio-bias phenomenon
Depressive realism from the perspective of cognitive-experiential self-theory
Individual differences in intuitive-experiential and analytical-rational thinking styles
The need for cognition
The empirical case for two systems of reasoning
A power primer
Heart and Mind in Conflict
| Unique citing works | 4 |
|---|---|
| Citations per year | 0,31 |
| Citation span | 2013 - 2026 (14) |
| Citation velocity | current |
| Highly cited | No |
| Citation types | Neutral: 4 |