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
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.