Searching for the reference point

Although reference dependence plays a central role in explaining behavior, little is known about the way that reference points are selected. This paper identifies empirically which reference point people use in decision under risk. We assume a comprehensive reference-dependent model that nests the main reference-dependent theories, including prospect theory, and that allows for isolating the reference point rule from other behavioral parameters. Our experiment involved high stakes with payoffs up to a week's salary. We used an optimal design to select the choices in the experiment and Bayesian hierarchical modeling for estimation. The most common reference points were the status quo and a security level (the maximum of the minimal outcomes of the prospects in a choice). We found little support for the use of expectations-based reference points

Measuring loss aversion under ambiguity: a method to make prospect theory completely observable

We propose a simple, parameter-free method that, for the first time, makes it possible to completely observe Tversky and Kahneman’s (1992) prospect theory. While methods exist to measure event weighting and the utility for gains and losses separately, there was no method to measure loss aversion under ambiguity. Our method allows this and thereby it can measure prospect theory’s entire utility function. Consequently, we can properly identify properties of utility and perform new tests of prospect theory. We implemented our method in an experiment and obtained support for prospect theory. Utility was concave for gains and convex for losses and there was substantial loss aversion. Both utility and loss aversion were the same for risk and ambiguity, as assumed by prospect theory, and sign-comonotonic trade-off consistency, the central condition of prospect theory, held

Phenotypic heterogeneity in fungi: importance and methodology

Phenotypic heterogeneity describes the variation that exists between individual cells, spores or other biological entities within genetically-uniform populations of fungi or other organisms. Studies over the last 10-15 years have successfully used laboratory- and modelling-based approaches to demonstrate the prevalence of phenotypic heterogeneity and characterise the molecular bases of the phenomenon (primarily centred around heterogeneous gene expression). In contrast to progress in these areas, the relevance of phenotypic heterogeneity for the competitive success of organisms in different natural scenarios, although widely speculated upon, has only recently begun to be investigated. This focus review addresses this latter question as tackled in recent studies with yeasts and filamentous fungi. We concentrate on the relevance to fungal activities such as survival against environmental stressors, pathogenesis, and spoilage. We also discuss methodologies for interrogating phenotypic heterogeneity in fungi. The emerging prevalence and apparent importance of fungal phenotypic heterogeneity provides a timely reminder that certain, potentially core aspects of fungal biology still remain widely under-explored

Obesity and the Rate of Time Preference: Is there a Connection?

We hypothesize that recent trends in U.S. and worldwide obesity are, in part, related to an increase in the marginal rate of time preference, where time preference refers to the rate at which people are willing to trade current benefit for future benefit. The higher the rate of time preference, the larger is the factor by which individuals discount the future health risks associated with current consumption. Data from the United States, as well as international evidence, suggests that a relationship between these two variables is plausible. We encourage researchers to explore the possible link between obesity and time preference, as important insights are likely to result

Accommodating stake effects under prospect theory

One of the stylized facts underlying prospect theory is a four-fold pattern of risk preferences. People have been shown to be risk seeking for small probability gains and large probability losses, while being risk averse for large probability gains and small probability losses. Another fourfold pattern of risk preferences over outcomes, postulated by Harry Markowitz in 1952, has received much less attention and is currently not integrated into prospect theory. In two experiments, we show that risk preferences may change over outcomes. While we find people to be risk seeking for small outcomes, this turns to risk neutrality and later risk aversion as stakes increase. We then show how a one-parameter logarithmic utility function fits such stake effects significantly better under prospect theory than the power or exponential functions mostly used when fitting prospect theory models. We further investigate the extent to which the use of ill-suited functional forms to represent utility may result in violations of prospect theory, and whether such violations disappear when using logarithmic utility

Paradoxes and Mechanisms for Choice under Risk

Experiments on choice under risk typically involve multiple decisions by individual subjects. The choice of mechanism for selecting decision(s) for payoff is an essential design feature unless subjects isolate each one of the multiple decisions. We report treatments with different payoff mechanisms but the same decision tasks. The data show large differences across mechanisms in subjects’ revealed risk preferences, a clear violation of isolation. We illustrate the importance of these mechanism effects by identifying their implications for classical tests of theories of decision under risk. We discuss theoretical properties of commonly used mechanisms, and new mechanisms introduced herein, in order to clarify which mechanisms are theoretically incentive compatible for which theories. We identify behavioral properties of some mechanisms that can introduce bias in elicited risk preferences – from cross-task contamination – even when the mechanism used is theoretically incentive compatible. We explain that selection of a payoff mechanism is an important component of experimental design in many topic areas including social preferences, public goods, bargaining, and choice under uncertainty and ambiguity as well as experiments on decisions under risk