An alternative perspective on von Winterfeldt et al.'s (1997) test of consequence monotonicity

Moon Ho R. Ho, Reinhard Niederée, Michel Regenwetter, Dieter Heyer

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

Abstract

D. von Winterfeldt, N.-K. Chung, R. D. Luce, and Y. Cho (1997) provided several tests for consequence monotonicity of choice or judgment, using certainty equivalents of gambles. The authors reaxiomatized consequence monotonicity in a probabilistic framework and reanalyzed von Winterfeldt et al.'s main experiment via a bootstrap method. Their application offers new insights into consequence monotonicity as well as into von Winterfeldt et al.'s 3 experimental paradigms: judged certainty equivalents (JCE), QUICKINDIFF, and parameter estimation by sequential testing (PEST). For QUICKINDIFF, the authors found no indication of violations of "random consequence monotonicity." This sharply contrasts the findings of von Winterfeldt et al., who concluded that axiom violations were the most pronounced under that procedure. The authors found potential evidence for violations in JCE and certainty equivalents derived from PEST.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)365-373
Number of pages9
JournalJournal of Experimental Psychology: Learning Memory and Cognition
Volume31
Issue number2
DOIs
StatePublished - Mar 1 2005

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Language and Linguistics
  • Experimental and Cognitive Psychology
  • Linguistics and Language

Fingerprint Dive into the research topics of 'An alternative perspective on von Winterfeldt et al.'s (1997) test of consequence monotonicity'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this