The Disjunction Effect: Does It Exist for Two-Step Gambles?

47Citations
Citations of this article
29Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.
Get full text

Abstract

One of the basic axioms of the rational theory of decision under uncertainty is Savage's (1954) Sure Thing Principle. It states that if Prospect x is preferred to Prospect y knowing that Event A occurred, and if x is preferred to y knowing that A did not occur, then x should also be preferred to y when it is not known whether A occurred. Tversky and Shafir (1992) claim to have demonstrated a violation of this principle in two-step gambles, which is termed a disjunction effect. The present article evaluates the replicability of the disjunction effect for two-step gambles. The findings show that people do not violate the sure thing principle in repeated gambles. The validity of alleged violations in other paradigms is discussed. © 2001 Academic Press.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Kühberger, A., Komunska, D., & Perner, J. (2001). The Disjunction Effect: Does It Exist for Two-Step Gambles? Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 85(2), 250–264. https://doi.org/10.1006/obhd.2000.2942

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free