Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
The value function that passes through the reference point is s-shaped and asymmetrical. The value function is steeper for losses than gains indicating that losses outweigh gains. Prospect theory stems from loss aversion, where the observation is that agents asymmetrically feel losses greater than that of an equivalent gain. It centralises ...
A typical value function in Prospect Theory and Cumulative Prospect Theory. It assigns values to possible outcomes of a lottery. The value function is asymmetric and steeper for losses than gains indicating that losses outweigh gains. A typical weighting function in Cumulative Prospect Theory.
Prospect theory and loss aversion suggests that most people would choose option B as they prefer the guaranteed $920 since there is a probability of winning $0, even though it is only 1%. This demonstrates that people think in terms of expected utility relative to a reference point (i.e. current wealth) as opposed to absolute payoffs.
Reference dependence is a central principle in prospect theory and behavioral economics generally. It holds that people evaluate outcomes and express preferences relative to an existing reference point, or status quo. It is related to loss aversion and the endowment effect. [1] [2]
For example, often individuals refuse the sale of their house or upscale their expected value simply due to their emotional attachment and effort poured into it. This means they might either stick with a property which causes greater inconvenience to alternatives or have an increased level of difficulties associated with its sale. [ 32 ]
The disposition effect has been described as one of the foremost vigorous actualities around individual investors because investors will hold stocks that have lost value yet sell stocks that have gained value." [2] In 1979, Daniel Kahneman and Amos Tversky traced the cause of the disposition effect to the so-called "prospect theory". [3]
One solution to the problem observed by Rabin is that proposed by prospect theory and cumulative prospect theory, where outcomes are considered relative to a reference point (usually the status quo), rather than considering only the final wealth. Another limitation is the reflection effect, which demonstrates the reversing of risk aversion.
The classic counter example to the expected value theory (where everyone makes the same "correct" choice) is the St. Petersburg Paradox. [ 3 ] In empirical applications, several violations of expected utility theory are systematic, and these falsifications have deepened our understanding of how people decide.