Differences
This shows you the differences between two versions of the page.
| Both sides previous revision Previous revision Next revision | Previous revision | ||
|
wop_research_projects_2016-2017 [2017/01/13 04:42] filination |
wop_research_projects_2016-2017 [2017/01/29 13:59] (current) filination [Mere ownership effect] |
||
|---|---|---|---|
| Line 57: | Line 57: | ||
| * [[http://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.1177/1948550610389338|Active Transgressions and Moral Elusions: Action Framing Influences Moral Behavior]] (SPPS) | * [[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://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 ==== | ==== Status quo bias ==== | ||
| Line 70: | Line 72: | ||
| * [[https://www.hks.harvard.edu/fs/rzeckhau/SQBDM.pdf|Status quo bias in decision making]] | * [[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) | * [[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 ==== | ==== Mere ownership effect ==== | ||
| Line 80: | Line 83: | ||
| - Good recent review http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1364661315000789 (see section about Psychological ownership) | - 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]] | - [[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]] | ||
| - | - When Do Objects Become More Attractive? The Individual and Interactive Effects of Choice and Ownership on Object Evaluation | + | - [[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://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://journal.sjdm.org/11/11915a/jdm11915a.html|Focusing on what you own: Biased information uptake due to ownership]] | ||
| Line 87: | Line 90: | ||
| - [[https://static1.squarespace.com/static/586fd7e2ff7c5060b1f0f079/t/58715c1fbf629afa513fefa8/1483824159577/Morewedge--Endowment+Effect.pdf|ENDOWMENT EFFECT CAREY MOREWEDGE Theory map]] | - [[https://static1.squarespace.com/static/586fd7e2ff7c5060b1f0f079/t/58715c1fbf629afa513fefa8/1483824159577/Morewedge--Endowment+Effect.pdf|ENDOWMENT EFFECT CAREY MOREWEDGE Theory map]] | ||
| - | ==== Decoy effect ==== | + | ==== 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. | Description: Introducing an irrelevant bad option to a choice between two options shifts preferences from one option to the other. | ||
| Line 93: | Line 96: | ||
| Readings: | 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). | * 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. | + | * 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 ==== | ==== Norm theory ==== | ||
| How social norms and past behavior affects judgments or feelings of regret. | How social norms and past behavior affects judgments or feelings of regret. | ||
| + | I suggest we focus on normality of action-inaction and regret | ||
| Readings: | Readings: | ||
| * See my preprint paper under review - https://osf.io/6jvh8/?view_only=4d181e034b974b59890650ed0f45d58b | * 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==== | + | ==== Inaction inertia (not chosen) ==== |
| People who pass once (inaction) tend to pass again in the future (inertia). | People who pass once (inaction) tend to pass again in the future (inertia). | ||
| Line 109: | Line 127: | ||
| * http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/10463283.2013.841481 | * http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/10463283.2013.841481 | ||
| - | ==== Counterfactuals/mutabilty with blame attributions ==== | + | ==== Counterfactuals/mutabilty with blame attributions (not chosen) ==== |
| people attribute more blame when it’s easier to think of alternatives (the outcome is mutable). | people attribute more blame when it’s easier to think of alternatives (the outcome is mutable). | ||