Preference reversal in quantum decision theory

We consider the psychological effect of preference reversal and show that it finds a natural explanation in the frame of quantum decision theory. When people choose between lotteries with non-negative payoffs, they prefer a more certain lottery because of uncertainty aversion. But when people evalua...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:Frontiers in psychology Vol. 6; p. 1538
Main Authors: Yukalov, Vyacheslav I, Sornette, Didier
Format: Journal Article
Language:English
Published: Switzerland Frontiers Media S.A 08-10-2015
Subjects:
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Description
Summary:We consider the psychological effect of preference reversal and show that it finds a natural explanation in the frame of quantum decision theory. When people choose between lotteries with non-negative payoffs, they prefer a more certain lottery because of uncertainty aversion. But when people evaluate lottery prices, e.g., for selling to others the right to play them, they do this more rationally, being less subject to behavioral biases. This difference can be explained by the presence of the attraction factors entering the expression of quantum probabilities. Only the existence of attraction factors can explain why, considering two lotteries with close utility factors, a decision maker prefers one of them when choosing, but evaluates higher the other one when pricing. We derive a general quantitative criterion for the preference reversal to occur that relates the utilities of the two lotteries to the attraction factors under choosing vs. pricing and test successfully its application on experiments by Tversky et al. We also show that the planning paradox can be treated as a kind of preference reversal.
Bibliography:ObjectType-Article-1
SourceType-Scholarly Journals-1
ObjectType-Feature-2
content type line 23
This article was submitted to Cognition, a section of the journal Frontiers in Psychology
Reviewed by: Peter Dixon, University of Alberta, Canada; Andrei Khrennikov, Linnaeus University, Sweden
These authors have contributed equally to this work.
Edited by: Sandro Sozzo, University of Leicester, UK
ISSN:1664-1078
1664-1078
DOI:10.3389/fpsyg.2015.01538