Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: http://hdl.handle.net/10419/222356
Authors: 
Alós-Ferrer, Carlos
Garagnani, Michele
Year of Publication: 
2020
Series/Report no.: 
Working Paper 330
Abstract: 
Influential economic approaches as random utility models or quantal-response equilibria assume a monotonic relation between error rates and choice difficulty or "strength of preference", in line with widespread evidence from discrimination tasks in psychology and neuroscience. However, while the latter define difficulty through objective dimensions (weight, length, etc), for economic decisions under risk the appropriate dimension remains unclear, with candidates including payoff-irrelevant numerical magnitudes. The very existence of the effects remains largely untested, because fitting models which assume such relations to data simply produces spurious findings. We provide a systematic empirical validation relying on two parsimonious experimental designs. Strength-of-preference effects are explained by expected values if objectively-correct answers exist, and by cardinal differences in independently-estimated utilities for preferential choices. Numerical magnitudes produce additional but minor effects. Finally, response times are inversely related to strength of preference, confirming that the observed relations are not "as if" explanations.
Subjects: 
stochastic choice
strength of preference
decision errors
risk attitude
choice difficulty
JEL: 
D01
D81
D91
Persistent Identifier of the first edition: 
Document Type: 
Working Paper

Files in This Item:
File
Size





Items in EconStor are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.