It is often claimed that negative events carry a larger weight than positive events. Loss aversion is the manifestation of this argument in monetary outcomes. In this review, we examine early studies of the utility function of gains and losses, and in particular the original evidence for loss aversion reported by Kahneman and Tversky (Econometrica 47:263–291, 1979). We suggest that loss aversion proponents have over-interpreted these findings. Specifically, the early studies of utility functions have shown that while very large losses are overweighted, smaller losses are often not. In addition, the findings of some of these studies have been systematically misrepresented to reflect loss aversion, though they did not find it. These findings shed light both on the inability of modern studies to reproduce loss aversion as well as a second literature arguing strongly for it.
Met onderstaand(e) abonnement(en) heeft u direct toegang:
BSL Psychologie Totaal
Met BSL Psychologie Totaal blijf je als professional steeds op de hoogte van de nieuwste ontwikkelingen binnen jouw vak. Met het online abonnement heb je toegang tot een groot aantal boeken, protocollen, vaktijdschriften en e-learnings op het gebied van psychologie en psychiatrie. Zo kun je op je gemak en wanneer het jou het beste uitkomt verdiepen in jouw vakgebied.
Acceptable losses: the debatable origins of loss aversion
Auteur:
Eldad Yechiam
Publicatiedatum
16-04-2018
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00426-018-1013-8
Uitgeverij
Springer Berlin Heidelberg
Tijdschrift
Psychological Research
An International Journal of Perception, Attention, Memory, and Action
Uitgave 7/2019
Print ISSN: 0340-0727
Elektronisch ISSN: 1430-2772