General Evaluability Theory - Christopher K. Hsee, Jiao Zhang, 2010


AI Summary Hide AI Generated Summary

Key Research Areas

This extensive bibliography compiles numerous research papers related to the evaluability hypothesis and its implications for judgment and decision-making. The papers explore preference reversals, a phenomenon where preferences change depending on whether options are evaluated jointly or separately.

Core Concepts

The research delves into how the manner of evaluation (joint vs. separate) affects choices. It examines various factors influencing preference reversals, including:

  • Attribute evaluability: How easily attributes can be assessed and compared.
  • Distinction bias: Overemphasis on differences between options.
  • Duration neglect: Underestimation or overestimation of the duration of experiences in retrospective evaluations.

Other themes explored include:

  • The role of emotions in decision-making (affective psychology).
  • The impact of temporal discounting (delay effects).
  • The relationship between income, wealth, and subjective well-being.

Many cited studies use experimental methodologies and analyze decision processes under risk.

Author Focus

The bibliography heavily features research by Christopher K. Hsee and his colleagues, reflecting their significant contributions to the understanding of the evaluability hypothesis and related cognitive biases.

Sign in to unlock more AI features Sign in with Google
Ariely, D., Loewenstein, G. (2000). When does duration matter in judgment and decision making? Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 129, 508–529. Google Scholar | Crossref | Medline | ISI Ariely, D., Loewenstein, G., Prelec, D. (2003). β€œCoherent arbitrariness”: Stable demand curves without stable preferences. Quarterly Journal of Economics, 118, 73–105. Google Scholar | Crossref | ISI Bazerman, M.H., Loewenstein, G., Blount White, S. (1992). Reversals of preference in allocation decisions: Judging an alternative versus choosing among alternative. Administrative Science Quarterly, 37, 220–240. Google Scholar | Crossref Bazerman, M.H., Schroth, H.A., Shah, P.P., Diekmann, K.A., Tenbrunsel, A.E. (1994). The inconsistent role of comparison others and procedural job descriptions: Implications for job acceptance decisions. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 60, 326–352. Google Scholar | Crossref Bazerman, M.H., Tenbrunsel, A.E., Wade-Benozi, K.A. (1998). Negotiation with yourself and losing: Understanding and managing competing internal preferences. Academic Management Review, 23, 225–241. Google Scholar | Crossref Brickman, P., Campbell, D.T. (1971). Hedonic relativism and planning the good society. In Appley, M.H. (Ed.), Adaptation level theory: A symposium (pp. 287–302). New York: Academic Press. Google Scholar Brickman, P., Coates, D., Janoff-Bulman, R. (1978). Lottery winners and accident victims: Is happiness relative? Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 36, 917–927. Google Scholar | Crossref | Medline | ISI Chatterjee, S., Heath, T.B., Min, J. (2009). The susceptibility of mental accounting principles to evaluation mode effects. Journal of Behavioral Decision Making, 22, 120–137. Google Scholar | Crossref Clark, A.E., Frijters, P., Shields, M. (2008). Relative income, happiness and utility: An explanation for the Easterlin paradox and other puzzles. Journal of Economic Literature, 46, 95–144. Google Scholar | Crossref | ISI Cryder, C.E., Mullen, E.E., Loewenstein, G. (2008, November). Wanting versus choosing: A disconnect between what moves us and what we prefer. Paper presented at the Society for Judgment and Decision Making Preconference: Using Human Nature to Improve Human Life, Chicago, IL. Google Scholar Desvousges, W.H., Johnson, F.R., Dunford, R.W., Boyle, S.P., Wilson, K.N. (1993). Measuring resource damages with contingent valuation. Tests of validity and reliability. In Hausman, J.A. (Ed.), Contingent valuation: A critical assessment (pp. 91–164). Amsterdam: North-Holland. Google Scholar | Crossref Diener, E., Biswas-Diener, R. (2002). Will money increase subjective well-being? Social Indicators Research, 57, 119–169. Google Scholar | Crossref | ISI Diener, E., Kahneman, D., Tov, W., Arora, R. (in press). Income’s association with judgments of life versus feelings. In Diener, E., Helliwell, J., Kahneman, D. (Eds.), International differences in well-being. New York: Oxford University Press. Google Scholar Diener, E., Lucas, R.E., Scollon, C.N. (2006). Beyond the hedonic treadmill: Revising the adaptation theory of well-being. American Psychologist, 61, 305–314. Google Scholar | Crossref | Medline | ISI Diener, E., Ng, W., Harter, J., Arora, R. (in press). Wealth and happiness across the world: Material prosperity predicts life evaluation, while psychosocial prosperity predicts positive feeling. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, Google Scholar Diener, E., Sandvik, E., Seidlitz, L., Diener, M. (1993). The relationship between income and subjective well-being: Relative or absolute? Social Indicators Research, 28, 195–223. Google Scholar | Crossref | ISI Dunn, E.W., Wilson, T.D., Gilbert, D.T. (2003). Location, location, location: The misprediction of satisfaction in housing lotteries. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 29, 1421–1432. Google Scholar | SAGE Journals | ISI Easterlin, R.A. (1974). Does economic growth improve the human lot? In David, P.A., Reder, M.W. (Eds.), Nations and households in economic growth: Essays in honor of Moses Abramovitz (pp. 89–125). New York: Academic Press. Google Scholar Easterlin, R.A. (1995). Will raising the incomes of all increase the happiness of all? Journal of Economic Behavior and Organization, 27, 35–47. Google Scholar | Crossref | ISI Festinger, L. (1954). A theory of social comparison. Human Relations, 7, 117–140. Google Scholar | SAGE Journals | ISI Fredrick, S., Loewenstein, G., O’Donoghue, T. (2002). Time discounting and time preference: A critical review. Journal of Economic Literature, 40, 351–401. Google Scholar | Crossref Fredrickson, B.L., Kahneman, D. (1993). Duration neglect in retrospective evaluations of affective episodes. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 65, 45–55. Google Scholar | Crossref | Medline | ISI Gilbert, D.T., Gill, M.J., Wilson, T.D. (2002). The future is now: Temporal correction in affective forecasting. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 88, 430–444. Google Scholar | Crossref | ISI Gilbert, D.T., Pinel, E.C., Wilson, T.D., Blumberg, S.J., Wheatley, T. (1998). Immune neglect: A source of durability bias in affective forecasting. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 75, 617–638. Google Scholar | Crossref | Medline | ISI Gonzalez, R., Wu, G. (1999). On the shape of the probability weighting function. Cognitive Psychology, 38, 129–166. Google Scholar | Crossref | Medline | ISI Gonzalez-Vallejo, C., Moran, E. (2001). The evaluability hypothesis revisited: Joint and separate evaluation preference reversal as a function of attribute importance. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 86, 216–233. Google Scholar | Crossref | ISI Helson, H. (1964). Adaptation-level theory. New York: Harper & Row. Google Scholar Hsee, C.K. (1996). The evaluability hypothesis: An explanation for preference reversals between joint and separate evaluations of alternatives. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 67, 247–257. Google Scholar | Crossref | ISI Hsee, C.K. (1998). Less is better: When low-value options are valued more highly than high-value options. Journal of Behavioral Decision Making, 11, 107–121. Google Scholar | Crossref | ISI Hsee, C.K., Blount, S., Loewenstein, G., Bazerman, M. (1999). Preference reversals between joint and separate evaluations of options: A review and theoretical analysis. Psychological Bulletin, 125, 576–590. Google Scholar | Crossref | ISI Hsee, C.K., Rottenstreich, Y. (2004). Music, pandas, and muggers: On the affective psychology of value. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 133, 23–30. Google Scholar | Crossref | Medline | ISI Hsee, C.K., Shen, L. (2009). Taxi versus horse: What affects consumer price sensitivity and when price-setters mispredict it? Unpublished manuscript. Google Scholar Hsee, C.K., Yang, Y., Li, N., Shen, L. (2009). Wealth, warmth, and well-being: Whether happiness is relative or absolute depends on whether it is about money, acquisition, or consumption. Journal of Marketing Research, 46, 396–409. Google Scholar | SAGE Journals | ISI Hsee, C.K., Zhang, J. (2004). Distinction bias: Misprediction and mischoice due to joint evaluation. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 86, 680–695. Google Scholar | Crossref | Medline | ISI Irwin, J.R., Slovic, P., Lichenstein, S., McClelland, G. (1993). Preference reversals and the measurement of environmental values. Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, 6, 5–18. Google Scholar | Crossref | ISI Kahneman, D. (2008). The sad tale of the aspiration treadmill. Retrieved May 21, 2009, from http://www.edge.org/q2008/q08_17.html#kahneman Google Scholar Kahneman, D., Fredrickson, B.L., Schreiber, C.A., Redelmeier, D.A. (1993). When more pain is preferred to less: Adding a better end. Psychological Science, 4, 401–405. Google Scholar | SAGE Journals | ISI Kahneman, D., Ritov, I. (1994). Determinants of stated willingness to pay for public goods: A study in the headline method. Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, 9, 5–38. Google Scholar | Crossref | Medline | ISI Kahneman, D., Snell, J. (1992). Predicting a changing taste: Do people know what they will like? Journal of Behavioral Decision Making, 5, 187–200. Google Scholar | Crossref Kahneman, D., Tversky, A. (1979). Prospect theory: An analysis of decision under risk. Econometrica, 47, 263–292. Google Scholar | Crossref | ISI Kluger, A.N., Stephan, E., Ganzach, Y., Hershkovitz, M. (2004). The effect of regulatory focus on the shape of probability-weighting function: Evidence from a cross-modality matching method. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 95, 20–39. Google Scholar | Crossref Kogut, T., Ritov, I. (2005). The singularity effect of identified victims in separate and joint evaluations. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 97, 106–116. Google Scholar | Crossref | ISI Larrick, R.P. (2004). Debiasing. In Koehler, D.J., Harvey, N. (Eds.), Blackwell handbook of judgment and decision making (pp. 316–337). Oxford, United Kingdom: Blackwell. Google Scholar | Crossref List, J. (2002). Preference reversals of a different kind: The β€œmore is less” phenomenon. American Economic Review, 92, 1636–1643. Google Scholar | Crossref Loewenstein, G., O’Donoghue, T., Rabin, M. (2003). Projection bias in predicting future utility. Quarterly Journal of Economics, 118, 1209–1248. Google Scholar | Crossref | ISI Loewenthal, D. (1993). Reversals of preference in candidate choice. Unpublished manuscript, Carnegie-Mellon University, Pittsburgh, PA. Google Scholar Moore, D.A. (1999). Order effects in preference judgments: Evidence for context dependence in the generation of preferences. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 78, 146–165. Google Scholar | Crossref | Medline | ISI Morewedge, C.K., Kassam, K.S., Hsee, C.K., Caruso, E.M. (2009). Duration sensitivity depends on stimulus familiarity. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 138, 177–186. Google Scholar | Crossref | Medline | ISI Paharia, N., Kassam, K.S., Greene, J.D., Bazerman, M.H. (2009). Dirty work, clean hands: The moral psychology of indirect agency. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 109, 134–141. Google Scholar | Crossref | ISI Read, D. (2004). Intertemporal choice. In Koehler, D.J., Harvey, N. (Eds.), Blackwell handbook of judgment and decision making (pp. 424–443). Oxford, United Kingdom: Blackwell. Google Scholar | Crossref Read, D., Frederick, S., Orsel, B., Rahman, J. (2005). Four scores and seven years from now: The date/delay effect in temporal discounting. Management Science, 51, 1326–1335. Google Scholar | Crossref Rottenstreich, Y., Hsee, C.K. (2001). Money, kisses, and electronic shocks: On the affective psychology of risk. Psychological Science, 12, 185–190. Google Scholar | SAGE Journals Schkade, D., Kahneman, D. (1998). Does living in California make people happy? A focusing illusion in judgments of life satisfaction. Psychological Science, 9, 340–346. Google Scholar | SAGE Journals | ISI Schmeltzer, C., Caverni, J., Warglien, M. (2004). How does preference reversal appear and disappear? Effects of the evaluation mode. Journal of Behavioral Decision Making, 17, 395–408. Google Scholar | Crossref | ISI Soman, D., Ainslie, G., Frederick, S., Xiuping, L., Moreau, P., Mitchell, A. (2005). The psychology of intertemporal discounting: Why are distant events valued more than proximal events? Marketing Letters, 347–360. Google Scholar | Crossref Stevenson, B., Wolfers, J. (2008). Economic growth and subjective well-being: Reassessing the Easterlin paradox. Bookings Papers on Economic Activity, 1–87. Google Scholar Tehila, K., Ritov, I. (2005). The singularity effect of identified victims in separate and joint evaluations. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 97, 106–116. Google Scholar | Crossref Van Boven, L., Loewenstein, G., Dunning, D. (2005). The illusion of courage in social predictions: Underestimating the impact of fear of embarrassment on other people. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 96, 130–141. Google Scholar | Crossref | ISI Veenhoven, R. (1991). Is happiness relative? Social Indicators Research, 24, 1–34. Google Scholar | Crossref | ISI Willemsen, M.C., Keren, G. (2004). The role of negative features in joint and separate evaluation. Journal of Behavioral Decision Making, 17, 313–329. Google Scholar | Crossref Wilson, T.D., Gilbert, D. (2003). Affective forecasting. Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, 35, 345–411. Google Scholar | Crossref | ISI Yeung, C., Soman, D. (2005). Attribute evaluability and the range effect. Journal of Consumer Research, 32, 363–369. Google Scholar | Crossref Yeung, C., Soman, D. (2007). The duration heuristic. Journal of Consumer Research, 34, 315–326. Google Scholar | Crossref Zhang, J., Hsee, C.K. (2009). Distinction bias: The moderating role of attribute evaluability. Unpublished manuscript. Google Scholar Zikmund-Fisher, B.J., Fagerlin, A., Ubel, P.A. (2004). β€œIs 28% good or bad?” Evaluability and preference reversals in health care decisions. Medical Decision Making, 24, 142–148. Google Scholar | SAGE Journals | ISI

Was this article displayed correctly? Not happy with what you see?


Share this article with your
friends and colleagues.
Earn points from views and
referrals who sign up.
Learn more

Facebook

Save articles to reading lists
and access them on any device


Share this article with your
friends and colleagues.
Earn points from views and
referrals who sign up.
Learn more

Facebook

Save articles to reading lists
and access them on any device