The ratio bias phenomenon: fact or artifact?

DOI10.1007/s11238-010-9212-9zbMath1274.91146OpenAlexW3125531460MaRDI QIDQ763344

Ferdinand M. Vieider, Mathieu Lefebvre, Marie Claire Villeval

Publication date: 9 March 2012

Published in: Theory and Decision (Search for Journal in Brave)

Full work available at URL: https://halshs.archives-ouvertes.fr/halshs-00435956/file/0925.pdf

zbMATH Keywords

experimentfinancial incentiveserror ratesratio bias

Mathematics Subject Classification ID

Decision theory (91B06) Sampling theory, sample surveys (62D05)

Related Items (3)

If nudge cannot be applied: a litmus test of the readers' stance on paternalism ⋮ Good decision vs. good results: outcome bias in the evaluation of financial agents ⋮ Comparing ambiguous urns with different sizes

Cites Work

• What is loss aversion?
• Do subjects separate (or are they sophisticated)?
• A parametric analysis of prospect theory's functionals for the general population
• Causes of ambiguity aversion: Known versus unknown preferences
• A tractable method to measure utility and loss aversion under prospect theory
• Advances in prospect theory: cumulative representation of uncertainty
• An index of loss aversion
• The effects of financial incentives in experiments: A review and capital-labor-production framework. (With commentaries)
• On probabilities and loss aversion
• The effect of the background risk in a simple chance improving decision model
• Risk, Ambiguity, and the Savage Axioms
• Parameter-Free Elicitation of Utility and Probability Weighting Functions
• Prospect Theory: An Analysis of Decision under Risk

This page was built for publication: The ratio bias phenomenon: fact or artifact?