Replicating patterns of prospect theory for decision under risk
Replicating patterns of prospect theory for decision under risk
复制标题
DOI：
10.1038/s41562-020-0886-x
复制
发表时间：
2020-05-18
影响因子：
29.9
通讯作者：
Folke, Tomas
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Ruggeri, Kai;Ali, Sonia;Folke, Tomas
前景理论是行为科学中最有影响力的理论框架之一，尤其是在风险决策研究中。卡尼曼和特沃斯基在1979年的研究中测试了风险下的金融选择，得出的结论是，这种判断严重偏离了预期效用理论的假设，这对科学，政策和工业产生了显着的影响。虽然大量的证据支持前景理论，但许多假定的规范理论已经引起了最近复制失败的审查。作为回应，我们在一项多国研究（n = 4，098名参与者，19个国家，13种语言）中直接测试了原始方法，仅根据当前和当地货币进行调整，同时要求所有参与者回答所有项目。结果重复了94%的项目，有一些衰减。13个理论对比中有12个得到复制，在一些国家复制率为100%。国家之间的异质性和个体内的差异突出了未来理论和应用的有意义的途径。我们的结论是，前景理论的实证基础超出了任何合理的阈值。在来自19个国家的4，000多名参与者的样本中，一项极具影响力的行为和决策研究的核心模式广泛复制，只有少数例外和较小的效应大小。
Prospect theory is among the most influential frameworks in behavioural science, specifically in research on decision-making under risk. Kahneman and Tversky's 1979 study tested financial choices under risk, concluding that such judgements deviate significantly from the assumptions of expected utility theory, which had remarkable impacts on science, policy and industry. Though substantial evidence supports prospect theory, many presumed canonical theories have drawn scrutiny for recent replication failures. In response, we directly test the original methods in a multinational study (n = 4,098 participants, 19 countries, 13 languages), adjusting only for current and local currencies while requiring all participants to respond to all items. The results replicated for 94% of items, with some attenuation. Twelve of 13 theoretical contrasts replicated, with 100% replication in some countries. Heterogeneity between countries and intra-individual variation highlight meaningful avenues for future theorizing and applications. We conclude that the empirical foundations for prospect theory replicate beyond any reasonable thresholds.In a sample of over 4,000 participants from 19 countries, the core patterns from a highly influential study on behaviour and decision-making broadly replicate, with only minor exceptions and somewhat smaller effect sizes.