Documente Academic
Documente Profesional
Documente Cultură
Research Question
Method/Design
3.00 EUR
3.00 EUR
3.00 EUR
3.00 EUR
3.00 EUR
3.00 EUR
Hypothesis:
Decoy option would increase the attractiveness of the risky lottery, thus
lowering the switching point.
Option A
1
2
Control
Group
Option B
3.00 EUR
SAMPLE
8
3.00 EUR
9
3.00 EUR
Variable
Ga
me
1
2
3
5
6
Control
20% for 0 euro
Group
10% for 0 euro
(N=9)
Decoy
Treatment
(N=8)
Age
22.44
24.375
Female
0.44
0.625
Bachelor Students
0.55
0.625
8
9
Option
A
3.00
EUR
3.00
euro
3.00
euro
3.00
euro
3.00
euro
3.00
euro
3.00
euro
3.00
euro
3.00
euro
Option B
10% for
6.00 euro
20% for
6.00 euro
30% for
6.00 euro
40% for
6.00 euro
50% for
6.00 euro
60% for
6.00 euro
70% for
6.00 euro
80% for
6.00 euro
90% for
6.00 euro
Option C
90% for
euro
80% for
euro
70% for
euro
60% for
euro
50% for
euro
40% for
euro
30% for
euro
20% for
euro
10% for
euro
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
12% for
5.2 euro
22% for
5.1 euro
32% for
5.0 euro
42% for
4.9 euro
52% for
4.8 euro
62% for
4.7 euro
72% for
4.6 euro
82% for
4.5 euro
92% for
4.4 euro
88% for
euro
78% for
euro
68% for
euro
58% for
euro
48% for
euro
38% for
euro
28% for
euro
18% for
euro
08% for
euro
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Results
Despite experimental evidence suggesting strong influence of the decoy option
(Dan Ariely Predictably Irrational; Huber, Payne(1984) ), the results were
inconclusive at most.
The average switching point of the treatment group was dragged down by one
subject(3, treatment), without the outlier, the average switching point with decoy
option would have been 5.42 which is even above the control group.
Overall, the data obtained is similar to the study from 2014 albeit lower stakes.
Control
Group
Gender
M
M
M
M
F
F
F
F
Age
20
20
19
28
20
23
26
22
Subject
Econs
History
Econs
Engl
Bio
Engl
Sociology
Chemistry
Degree
Abitur
Abitur
Abitur
BA
Abitur
Abitur
BSc
BSc
Switching Point
4
4
4
6
6
5
6
7
24
Politics/Economics
BSc
22.44
Control vs Treatment
100%
Treatm
ent
Group
80%
60%
Control Group
Treatment Group
40%
20%
0%
Player ID
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
F
F
M
F
M
M
F
F
26
25
23
26
23
25
21
26
24.38
Switching Point
Analysis
What could go (went) wrong:
List effect
People got used to seeing the alternative option and thus their consideration set
included only first two options
Small subject pool
References:
Huber, Joel, John W. Payne, and Christopher Puto. "Adding asymmetrically dominated alternatives: Violations of regularity and the
similarity hypothesis."Journal of consumer research(1982): 90-98.
Masatlioglu, Yusufcan, and Efe A. Ok. "Rational choice with status quo bias."Journal of Economic Theory121.1 (2005): 1-29.
Fox, Craig R., and David Tannenbaum. "The elusive search for stable risk preferences."Frontiers in psychology2 (2011).
Abitur
Abitur
BSc
BSc
Abitur
Abitur
Abitur
BSc
5.22
8
0
4
7
5
3
6
5
4.75