Moderating Loss Aversion: Loss Aversion Has Moderators, But Reports of its Death are Greatly Exaggerated
Moderating Loss Aversion: Loss Aversion Has Moderators, But Reports of its Death are Greatly Exaggerated
复制标题
DOI：
10.1002/jcpy.1156
复制
发表时间：
2019-12
期刊：
影响因子：
--
通讯作者：
Kellen Mrkva;Eric J. Johnson;S. Gaechter;A. Herrmann
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Kellen Mrkva;Eric J. Johnson;S. Gaechter;A. Herrmann
损失厌恶，即损失对决策的影响大于等价收益的原则，是消费者行为和决策的基本思想，尽管它的存在最近受到质疑。在五个独特的样本（Ntotal = 17，720）中，我们测试了关于什么会调节损失厌恶的预测，这些预测来自偏好构建账户。在所有研究中，更多的领域知识，经验和教育与较低的损失厌恶相关，尽管所有知识，经验和教育水平的人都厌恶损失。在购车者中，那些对汽车的特定属性（例如，燃料经济性）对于该属性而不是其它属性（例如，舒适度），这与属性知识较少的人更有可能构建偏好的想法一致，从而增加了损失厌恶。此外，在不同的损失厌恶措施和研究中，老年消费者更厌恶损失。我们讨论了损失厌恶的几个帐户的影响，包括植根于现状偏见，情绪，或所有权的感觉替代帐户。除了发现关键的损失厌恶调节剂，我们对最近的说法表示怀疑，即损失厌恶是一种谬论，或者完全可以用现状偏见、风险厌恶或经常用于研究损失厌恶的受过教育的实验室样本来解释。
Loss aversion, the principle that losses impact decision making more than equivalent gains, is a fundamental idea in consumer behavior and decision making, though its existence has recently been called into question. Across five unique samples (Ntotal = 17,720), we tested predictions about what moderates loss aversion, which were derived from a preference construction account. Across studies, more domain knowledge, experience, and education were associated with lower loss aversion, though people of all knowledge, experience, and education levels were loss averse. Among car buyers, those who knew more about a particular car attribute (e.g., fuel economy) were less loss averse for that attribute but not other attributes (e.g., comfort), consistent with the idea that people with less attribute knowledge are more likely to construct preferences, thereby increasing loss aversion. Additionally, older consumers were more loss averse across different loss aversion measures and studies. We discuss implications for several accounts of loss aversion, including alternative accounts rooted in status quo bias, emotion, or feelings of ownership. In addition to discovering key loss aversion moderators, we cast doubt on recent claims that loss aversion is a fallacy or is fully explained by status quo bias, risk aversion, or the educated laboratory samples often used to study loss aversion.