wop_research_projects_2016-2017

Differences

This shows you the differences between two versions of the page.

Link to this comparison view

Both sides previous revision Previous revision
Next revision
Previous revision
wop_research_projects_2016-2017 [2016/11/09 14:07]
filination [Extended information]
wop_research_projects_2016-2017 [2017/01/29 13:59] (current)
filination [Mere ownership effect]
Line 1: Line 1:
-====== WOP Research projects 2016-2017 ======+====== ​ASP/WOP/HDS Research projects 2016-2017 ======
  
  
Line 40: Line 40:
   - Indicate that you understand and accept to the goal of turning the thesis to a high-quality top-tier journal article submission.   - Indicate that you understand and accept to the goal of turning the thesis to a high-quality top-tier journal article submission.
  
 +
 +===== Specific topics =====
 +
 +==== Action/​inaction and harm/​responsibility====
 +
 +  * Omission bias: People prefer harm through omission (inaction) than harm through commission (action). ​
 +  * The action principle: People judge harm caused by action as morally worse than equivalent harm caused by omission (inaction).
 +
 +
 +Readings:
 +  * [[https://​www.sas.upenn.edu/​~baron/​papers/​obias.pdf|Omission bias, individual differences,​ and normality]] ​ (this article shows that this topic and the findings so far are controversial. So this is great for a replication+meta).
 +  * [[https://​www.sas.upenn.edu/​~baron/​papers/​indirect.pdf|The Preference for Indirect Harm]]
 +  * [[https://​www.researchgate.net/​profile/​Robert_Kurzban/​publication/​228426883_The_Omission_Effect_in_Moral_Cognition_Toward_a_Functional_Explanation/​links/​00b49533ace86bc44b000000.pdf|The omission effect in moral cognition: toward a functional explanation]]
 +  * [[http://​pdescioli.com/​papers/​descioli.etal.omission.ps11.pdf|The Omission Strategy]]
 +  * [[https://​pdfs.semanticscholar.org/​276a/​63954d90f49187b8644406c85168da2179a8.pdf|Testing Three Principles of Harm]]
 +  * [[http://​journals.sagepub.com/​doi/​abs/​10.1177/​1948550610389338|Active Transgressions and Moral Elusions: Action Framing Influences Moral Behavior]] (SPPS)
 +  * [[http://​www.kevinreuter.com/​ewExternalFiles/​Is_there_really_an_omission_effect.pdf|Is there really an omission effect?​]] ​
 +  * [[http://​scholarship.law.cornell.edu/​cgi/​viewcontent.cgi?​article=2916&​context=clr|A NORMALITY BIAS IN LEGALDECISION MAKING]] - although this is a law paper, it has a very extensive introduction you can use for your lit-review ​
 +  * Another good review - [[http://​www.sciencedirect.com.sci-hub.cc/​science/​article/​pii/​S0065260108603226|COUNTERFACTUAL THINKING ​ AND SOCIAL PERCEPTION: THINKING ABOUT WHAT MIGHT HAVE BEEN]] ​ (focus especially on IIb)
 +  * [[http://​www.tandfonline.com.sci-hub.cc/​doi/​abs/​10.1080/​02699930903512168|The effects of action, normality, and decision carefulnesson ​ anticipated ​ regret: ​ Evidence ​ for  a  broad  mediatingrole ​ of  decision ​ justifiability]] (2010) - they generally oppose Baron & Ritov
 +
 +==== Status quo bias ====
 +
 +Description:​ People generally prefer the status quo over change. ​
 +
 +Readings:
 +  * [[http://​pubs.aeaweb.org/​doi/​pdfplus/​10.1257/​jep.5.1.193|Kahneman,​ Knetsch, & Thaler]] (page 197)
 +  * good review - [[http://​sci-hub.cc/​doi/​10.1521/​soco.2010.28.2.191|Loss Aversion and Status Quo Label Bias]]
 +  * [[https://​wesfiles.wesleyan.edu/​courses/​PSYC-309-clwilkins/​week3/​Eidelman%20Crandall%202012.pdf|Bias in Favor of the Status Quo]] (SPPC, 2012)
 +  * [[https://​www.researchgate.net/​profile/​J_Inman/​publication/​24099122_Regret_in_Repeat_Purchase_versus_Switching_Decisions_The_Attenuating_Role_of_Decision_Justifiability/​links/​0046351d1b33758b7c000000.pdf|Regret in Repeat Purchase versus Switching Decisions: The Attenuating Role of Decision Justifiability]] (JCR, 2002)
 +  * [[https://​www.hks.harvard.edu/​fs/​rzeckhau/​SQBDM.pdf|Status quo bias in decision making]]
 +  * [[https://​pdfs.semanticscholar.org/​069f/​8e0c981d32244ebe480a17019bc9360e725c.pdf|The Psychology of Doing Nothing]] (PsycBull, 2003)
 +  * [[http://​scholarship.law.cornell.edu/​cgi/​viewcontent.cgi?​article=2916&​context=clr|A NORMALITY BIAS IN LEGALDECISION MAKING]] - although this is a law paper, it has a very extensive introduction you can use for your lit-review ​
 +
 +==== Mere ownership effect ====
 +
 +Description:​ Simply thinking you own something makes you value it more. 
 +
 +Also can look up: The endowment effect (but stay away from articles in Economics or Organizational Behavior)
 +
 +Readings: ​
 +  - Good recent review http://​www.sciencedirect.com/​science/​article/​pii/​S1364661315000789 (see section about Psychological ownership)
 +  - [[https://​www.researchgate.net/​profile/​Graham_Brown6/​publication/​254409337_Blind_in_one_eye_How_psychological_ownership_of_ideas_affects_the_types_of_suggestions_people_adopt/​links/​00b4953bc6bfa18f8d000000.pdf|Blind in one eye: How psychological ownership of ideas affects the typesof suggestions people adopt]]
 +  - [[http://​journals.sagepub.com/​doi/​pdf/​10.1177/​0146167209333046|When Do Objects Become More Attractive? The Individual and Interactive Effects of Choice and Ownership on Object Evaluation]]
 +  - [[http://​www2.psych.ubc.ca/​~heine/​docs/​endowmenteffect.pdf|For Whom Is Parting With Possessions More Painful? Cultural Differences in the Endowment Effect]]
 +  - [[http://​journal.sjdm.org/​11/​11915a/​jdm11915a.html|Focusing on what you own: Biased information uptake due to ownership]]
 +  - [[http://​s3.amazonaws.com/​academia.edu.documents/​39466654/​Explaining_the_Endowment_Effect_through_20151027-4068-1y7ruew.pdf|Explaining the Endowment Effect throughOwnership:​ The Role of Identity, Gender,and Self-Threat]]
 +  - [[https://​kuscholarworks.ku.edu/​bitstream/​handle/​1808/​14032/​Chatterjee_et_at_2013.pdf|The Endowment Effect as Self-Enhancement in Response to Threat]]
 +  - [[https://​static1.squarespace.com/​static/​586fd7e2ff7c5060b1f0f079/​t/​58715c1fbf629afa513fefa8/​1483824159577/​Morewedge--Endowment+Effect.pdf|ENDOWMENT EFFECT CAREY MOREWEDGE Theory map]]
 +
 +==== Decoy effect / Asymmetric dominance / attraction effect ====
 +
 +Description:​ Introducing an irrelevant bad option to a choice between two options shifts preferences from one option to the other. ​
 +
 +Readings:
 +  * Example of a meta-analysis from 1995: http://​bit.ly/​2iZcreM and we’ll do the decoy effect meta on an updated literature and from a different angle (factors).
 +  * I strongly suggest reading Ariely'​s experiments in predictability irrational. Quite entertaining. (see Ariely'​s book in the Dropbox) (see [[https://​www.ted.com/​talks/​dan_ariely_asks_are_we_in_control_of_our_own_decisions?​utm_source=tedcomshare&​utm_medium=referral&​utm_campaign=tedspread|Dan'​s TED video]], start from 11:00 for the Decoy Effect)
 +  * The classic experiment - [[http://​www.dtic.mil/​get-tr-doc/​pdf?​AD=ADA101132|Adding asymmetrically dominated alternatives:​ Violations of regularity and the similarity hypothesis]] (Huber, Payne, & Puto, 1982) - This one is a bit hard to read/follow
 +  * [[http://​web.mit.edu/​ariely/​www/​MIT/​Papers/​ade.pdf|Seeking Subjective Dominance in Multidimensional Space: An Explanation of the Asymmetric Dominance Effect]] (Ariely & Wallsten, 1995) - much clearer
 +  * [[http://​journals.ama.org.sci-hub.cc/​doi/​abs/​10.1509/​jmr.14.0020|More evidence challenging the robustness and usefulness of the attraction effect]] - good paper about the problems with findings - see their experiments in the [[http://​journals.ama.org/​doi/​suppl/​10.1509/​jmr.14.0020/​suppl_file/​jmr.14.0020-web-appendix.pdf|supplementary materials]]
 +  * [[http://​repositorio.uchile.cl/​bitstream/​handle/​2250/​128655/​Regret%20salience.pdf?​sequence=1|Regret salience and accountability in the decoy effect]] (2013) - links decoy effect with the other students'​ biases
 +  * [[https://​kuscholarworks.ku.edu/​bitstream/​handle/​1808/​17776/​MishraS_JMR_30(3)331.pdf?​sequence=1|Antecedents of the attraction effect: An information-processing approach]] ​
 +  * It also works in frogs - [[https://​www.researchgate.net/​profile/​Michael_Ryan22/​publication/​281337999_SEXUAL_SELECTION_Irrationality_in_mate_choice_revealed_by_tungara_frogs/​links/​55e4c57008aede0b57358026.pdf|Irrationality in mate choice revealedby túngara frogs]] (Science, 2015) (but we won't try and replicate that one)
 +
 +
 +==== Norm theory ====
 +
 +How social norms and past behavior affects judgments or feelings of regret. ​
 +I suggest we focus on normality of action-inaction and regret
 +
 +Readings:
 +  * See my preprint paper under review - https://​osf.io/​6jvh8/?​view_only=4d181e034b974b59890650ed0f45d58b  ​
 +  * [[http://​scholarship.law.cornell.edu/​cgi/​viewcontent.cgi?​article=2916&​context=clr|A NORMALITY BIAS IN LEGALDECISION MAKING]] - although this is a law paper, it has a very extensive introduction you can use for your lit-review ​
 +  * Another good review - [[http://​www.sciencedirect.com.sci-hub.cc/​science/​article/​pii/​S0065260108603226|COUNTERFACTUAL THINKING ​ AND SOCIAL PERCEPTION: THINKING ABOUT WHAT MIGHT HAVE BEEN]] ​ (focus especially on IIa2, IIIa, Va and Vb)
 +  * [[http://​www.tandfonline.com.sci-hub.cc/​doi/​abs/​10.1080/​02699930903512168|The effects of action, normality, and decision carefulnesson ​ anticipated ​ regret: ​ Evidence ​ for  a  broad  mediatingrole ​ of  decision ​ justifiability]] (2010) - good experimental design, but no effects for normality
 +  * [[https://​www.researchgate.net/​profile/​Gary_Wells3/​publication/​222901869_Counterfactual_processing_of_normal_and_exceptional_events/​links/​54dbb7db0cf2a7769d928d93.pdf|Counterfactual Processing of Normal and Exceptional Events]] (1989) - simple design, easy to follow
 +  * [[https://​pure.uvt.nl/​portal/​files/​475310/​zeelenberg-2002_JPSP.pdf|The inaction effect in the psychology of regret]] (2002) - I replicated their study.
 +  * [[https://​www.researchgate.net/​profile/​Gary_Wells3/​publication/​232472793_The_Undoing_of_Scenarios/​links/​55ba736608aed621de0ad0fb.pdf|The Undoing of Scenarios]] (JPSP, 1987) - this one is a bit complicated,​ only if you feel like it
 +
 +
 +==== Inaction inertia (not chosen) ====
 +
 +People who pass once (inaction) tend to pass again in the future (inertia).
 +
 +Readings:
 +  * http://​www.tandfonline.com/​doi/​abs/​10.1080/​10463283.2013.841481 ​
 +
 +==== Counterfactuals/​mutabilty with blame attributions (not chosen) ​ ====
 +
 +people attribute more blame when it’s easier to think of alternatives (the outcome is mutable).
 +
 +Readings:
 +  * http://​bit.ly/​2jgi5bT (see section “Moral Judgments”)
  
  • wop_research_projects_2016-2017.1478725640.txt.gz
  • Last modified: 2016/11/09 14:07
  • by filination