@PavelDAtanasov From my read of the paper, this doesn't seem to be the case. But it's worth mentioning that K&T themselves offer a very selective (i.e. biased) review of the prior literature, so this just creates a second-order problem: biased citation
@homhom2453 例えばこれとかかなぁ~大きな損失回避はそうだけど小さな損失は?って話があるし、他にもナッジとかは効果量少なすぎん?ってなってるぽくてヤバいぜ!ってなってるらしい https://t.co/MzZw8bcdUU
ブログで引用された論文のこの文章なんかモヤモヤするわ: "The concept of loss aversion is central to Kahneman and Tversky’s prospect theory and its distinction from expected utility theory [Bernoulli, (1738 [1954]); von Neumann & Morgenstern, 1944]" https://t.co/8Fwsda4sAo
Acceptable losses: the debatable origins of loss aversion https://t.co/gQUvM2oSNZ
@hardsci I haven't read the paper in question (https://t.co/Ad6I91xjYp) am not an expert in this domain of JDM, so can't really comment on that element of it. I do know the findings have stood the test of time (unlike so many others) and think that should
@hardsci Main evidence seems to be this Yechiam paper, which I’ve not yet read. If it stands up then the hyperbolic headline is probably justified. Big if. https://t.co/6LbbfqPIZy
2018 paper finds that "early studies of utility functions [...] have been systematically misrepresented to reflect loss aversion, though they did not find it." https://t.co/fg8sZQ7R67 1/2
Can’t wait to read it
Acceptable losses: the debatable origins of loss aversion | SpringerLink https://t.co/54SPxPRpRq
@SamCoatesSky @mrjamesob Google ‘The Replication Crisis in Behavioural Science’, read this 👉, then hide. https://t.co/L7xqBaAk3h
@EtienneWasmer Here is the second round: psychologists 1 - behavioral 0 https://t.co/JsQgIeRIUn
@ben_golub There are also some empirical problems with the significance of the parameter, but that's another issue. This is a recent nice paper about it: https://t.co/whid2d8Hf8
@kangasbros Joissain yhteyksissä tämä on onnistuttu toistamaan, toisissa ei (erit. jos on isoa vaihtelua laskutaidossa, ks. kuvakaappaus). Toi klassikkopaperi on todennäköisesti parivaljakon tärkeimpiä. Tästä löytyy myös lisätietoja: https://t.co/pWRjRqju
@JohannesKuusis1 enenevissä määrin kritiikkiä myös prospektiteorian kuvauksia vastaan. Tässä yksi viimeisimmistä. https://t.co/uZyxFjb9lu https://t.co/yJ3h4dwHn0
On my reading list...
@robinhanson On a similar note https://t.co/QJTJd6sjV6 risk aversion was misinterpreted as loss aversion by behavioral economists
Wow. Seems like behavioral economists were interpreting concave utility fns as showing "loss aversion". i.e. if you dislike 0.5 chance of +$1000 or -$900, Kahneman et al would see loss aversion. But loss aversion also implies u dislike 0.5 chance of +$1 o
@PeteWargent Just be cautious about chapter 4 on priming and the material on loss aversion: https://t.co/v6KURknUmR https://t.co/VR4Y7lbJEm
@JureDokl Replication crisis https://t.co/zQAS4RrnES
RT @DegenRolf: People didn't cheat any more when a task was framed as avoiding a loss rather than securing a win https://t.co/yH0buvStba bo…
Loss aversion questioned
@fourbeerspod Since you mention it, curious to get your take on new criticisms of loss aversion https://t.co/fY1K0B6OEj and https://t.co/jMPR64SZnV, perhaps not a huge hole for alves et al?
@ronvrn Dank! Ik had ze al gezien en ze staan uiteraard op de referentielijst voor het geplande artikel (ik dacht dat je doelde op een specifiek antwoord op het Gal artikel of het Gal/Rucker paper). Hier is er nog eentje mocht je die gemist hebben: https:
RT @pitiklinov: Problemas de replicación para el concepto de aversión a las pérdidas que trabajaron Kahneman y Tversky (veremos si pasa lo…
RT @HarryGreenwell: a challenge to loss aversion, one of the canonical ‘findings’ of behavioural economics. haven’t read yet but deserves a…
a challenge to loss aversion, one of the canonical ‘findings’ of behavioural economics. haven’t read yet but deserves attention. @beta_gov_au h/t @mariamchammat https://t.co/9nOrrQxv2S
RT @DegenRolf: People didn't cheat any more when a task was framed as avoiding a loss rather than securing a win https://t.co/yH0buvStba bo…
RT @DegenRolf: People didn't cheat any more when a task was framed as avoiding a loss rather than securing a win https://t.co/yH0buvStba bo…
RT @DegenRolf: People didn't cheat any more when a task was framed as avoiding a loss rather than securing a win https://t.co/yH0buvStba bo…
RT @DegenRolf: People didn't cheat any more when a task was framed as avoiding a loss rather than securing a win https://t.co/yH0buvStba bo…
RT @DegenRolf: People didn't cheat any more when a task was framed as avoiding a loss rather than securing a win https://t.co/yH0buvStba bo…
RT @DegenRolf: People didn't cheat any more when a task was framed as avoiding a loss rather than securing a win https://t.co/yH0buvStba bo…
RT @DegenRolf: People didn't cheat any more when a task was framed as avoiding a loss rather than securing a win https://t.co/yH0buvStba bo…
RT @DegenRolf: People didn't cheat any more when a task was framed as avoiding a loss rather than securing a win https://t.co/yH0buvStba bo…
RT @DegenRolf: People didn't cheat any more when a task was framed as avoiding a loss rather than securing a win https://t.co/yH0buvStba bo…
RT @DegenRolf: People didn't cheat any more when a task was framed as avoiding a loss rather than securing a win https://t.co/yH0buvStba bo…
People didn't cheat any more when a task was framed as avoiding a loss rather than securing a win https://t.co/yH0buvStba boosting recent challenges to the validity of "loss aversion" https://t.co/1SYrb4E4Pz https://t.co/eirfNvTKmx
That’s study No 1, mentioned in the article everyone is wondering about @RobertLepenies @SvenjaFl @GodMocks @ErikAngner https://t.co/oSvaqVWFbe
RT @ole_b_peters: Fatal conceptual confusion. ”Loss aversion" (e.g. avoiding death) optimizes time-average growth, not expectation-value gr…
RT @ole_b_peters: Fatal conceptual confusion. ”Loss aversion" (e.g. avoiding death) optimizes time-average growth, not expectation-value gr…
RT @DegenRolf: Loss aversion, the first law of behavioral economics, enters psychology's reproducibility crisis. https://t.co/MuLX2N4jTk ht…
RT @DegenRolf: Loss aversion, the first law of behavioral economics, enters psychology's reproducibility crisis. https://t.co/MuLX2N4jTk ht…
Acceptable losses: the debatable origins of loss aversion: https://t.co/yTgqdyqHdK
RT @koenfucius: How real is loss aversion? Paper challenges the debatable origins of one of the fundamental behavioural economics effect ht…
RT @allanfromen: Not again! If confirmation bias falls next, I’m done. #psychology #behavioralscience #replicationcrisis #BehavioralEconomi…
RT @ole_b_peters: Fatal conceptual confusion. ”Loss aversion" (e.g. avoiding death) optimizes time-average growth, not expectation-value gr…
RT @ole_b_peters: Fatal conceptual confusion. ”Loss aversion" (e.g. avoiding death) optimizes time-average growth, not expectation-value gr…
RT @ole_b_peters: Fatal conceptual confusion. ”Loss aversion" (e.g. avoiding death) optimizes time-average growth, not expectation-value gr…
RT @DegenRolf: Loss aversion, the first law of behavioral economics, enters psychology's reproducibility crisis. https://t.co/MuLX2N4jTk ht…
RT @ole_b_peters: Fatal conceptual confusion. ”Loss aversion" (e.g. avoiding death) optimizes time-average growth, not expectation-value gr…
@NGruen1 Oh wait... https://t.co/CB599smphn
RT @DegenRolf: Loss aversion, the first law of behavioral economics, enters psychology's reproducibility crisis. https://t.co/MuLX2N4jTk ht…
RT @ole_b_peters: Fatal conceptual confusion. ”Loss aversion" (e.g. avoiding death) optimizes time-average growth, not expectation-value gr…
RT @DegenRolf: Loss aversion, the first law of behavioral economics, enters psychology's reproducibility crisis. https://t.co/MuLX2N4jTk ht…
RT @CFCamerer: Will address this paper, reluctantly, after finishing ongoing inclusive meta-analysis plus brain, cross-species, field data.…
RT @DegenRolf: Loss aversion, the first law of behavioral economics, enters psychology's reproducibility crisis. https://t.co/MuLX2N4jTk ht…
RT @DegenRolf: Loss aversion, the first law of behavioral economics, enters psychology's reproducibility crisis. https://t.co/MuLX2N4jTk ht…
RT @DegenRolf: Loss aversion, the first law of behavioral economics, enters psychology's reproducibility crisis. https://t.co/MuLX2N4jTk ht…
RT @ole_b_peters: Fatal conceptual confusion. ”Loss aversion" (e.g. avoiding death) optimizes time-average growth, not expectation-value gr…
To me, the debate over the replicability of loss aversion reinforces the way in which applied #behaviouralscience has to take an integrative approach. We draw on a range of academic work but quickly determine what is useful to solve our client challenges.
... but that would be qualitatively... rational. https://t.co/0IbPRKErUp https://t.co/IOn0kluzDL
Loss aversion may only be relevant with respect to relatively large losses. https://t.co/IOn0kluzDL
RT @CFCamerer: Will address this paper, reluctantly, after finishing ongoing inclusive meta-analysis plus brain, cross-species, field data.…
RT @CFCamerer: Will address this paper, reluctantly, after finishing ongoing inclusive meta-analysis plus brain, cross-species, field data.…
RT @koenfucius: How real is loss aversion? Paper challenges the debatable origins of one of the fundamental behavioural economics effect ht…
RT @DegenRolf: Loss aversion, the first law of behavioral economics, enters psychology's reproducibility crisis. https://t.co/MuLX2N4jTk ht…
RT @koenfucius: How real is loss aversion? Paper challenges the debatable origins of one of the fundamental behavioural economics effect ht…
RT @CFCamerer: Will address this paper, reluctantly, after finishing ongoing inclusive meta-analysis plus brain, cross-species, field data.…
RT @ole_b_peters: Fatal conceptual confusion. ”Loss aversion" (e.g. avoiding death) optimizes time-average growth, not expectation-value gr…
RT @seanrose: “In the last 10 years, some studies revisiting the original paradigm of Kahneman and Tversky using 50:50 lotteries could not…
RT @DegenRolf: Loss aversion, the first law of behavioral economics, enters psychology's reproducibility crisis. https://t.co/MuLX2N4jTk ht…
RT @DegenRolf: Loss aversion, the first law of behavioral economics, enters psychology's reproducibility crisis. https://t.co/MuLX2N4jTk ht…
RT @DegenRolf: Loss aversion, the first law of behavioral economics, enters psychology's reproducibility crisis. https://t.co/MuLX2N4jTk ht…
RT @seanrose: “In the last 10 years, some studies revisiting the original paradigm of Kahneman and Tversky using 50:50 lotteries could not…
RT @DegenRolf: Loss aversion, the first law of behavioral economics, enters psychology's reproducibility crisis. https://t.co/MuLX2N4jTk ht…
RT @ole_b_peters: Fatal conceptual confusion. ”Loss aversion" (e.g. avoiding death) optimizes time-average growth, not expectation-value gr…
RT @CFCamerer: Will address this paper, reluctantly, after finishing ongoing inclusive meta-analysis plus brain, cross-species, field data.…
RT @DegenRolf: Loss aversion, the first law of behavioral economics, enters psychology's reproducibility crisis. https://t.co/MuLX2N4jTk ht…
RT @CFCamerer: Will address this paper, reluctantly, after finishing ongoing inclusive meta-analysis plus brain, cross-species, field data.…
“Loss” is in the eyes of the beholder? https://t.co/KE9m9lRFaV
RT @ProfByron: Uh oh. This isn’t going to be popular. https://t.co/dRe4jNKgxK
RT @CFCamerer: Will address this paper, reluctantly, after finishing ongoing inclusive meta-analysis plus brain, cross-species, field data.…
RT @CFCamerer: Will address this paper, reluctantly, after finishing ongoing inclusive meta-analysis plus brain, cross-species, field data.…
RT @koenfucius: How real is loss aversion? Paper challenges the debatable origins of one of the fundamental behavioural economics effect ht…
Will address this paper, reluctantly, after finishing ongoing inclusive meta-analysis plus brain, cross-species, field data. May well be true there is no loss aversion for nickels https://t.co/11I1bbqcSq
It has begun https://t.co/1V4SUPxval
RT @koenfucius: How real is loss aversion? Paper challenges the debatable origins of one of the fundamental behavioural economics effect ht…
RT @DegenRolf: Loss aversion, the first law of behavioral economics, enters psychology's reproducibility crisis. https://t.co/MuLX2N4jTk ht…
RT @jposhaughnessy: Wow! If this is correct, it's really big news. https://t.co/SJcODva8Bo
RT @koenfucius: How real is loss aversion? Paper challenges the debatable origins of one of the fundamental behavioural economics effect ht…
RT @DegenRolf: Loss aversion, the first law of behavioral economics, enters psychology's reproducibility crisis. https://t.co/MuLX2N4jTk ht…
RT @koenfucius: How real is loss aversion? Paper challenges the debatable origins of one of the fundamental behavioural economics effect ht…
RT @seanrose: “In the last 10 years, some studies revisiting the original paradigm of Kahneman and Tversky using 50:50 lotteries could not…
RT @jposhaughnessy: Wow! If this is correct, it's really big news. https://t.co/SJcODva8Bo
RT @DegenRolf: Loss aversion, the first law of behavioral economics, enters psychology's reproducibility crisis. https://t.co/MuLX2N4jTk ht…
RT @DegenRolf: Loss aversion, the first law of behavioral economics, enters psychology's reproducibility crisis. https://t.co/MuLX2N4jTk ht…
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. https://t.co/W903u3C0M9 https://t.