The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Economic Theory of Choice and the Preference Reversal Phenomenon
Abstract
A body of data and theory has been developing within psychology that should be of interest to economists. Taken at face value the data are simply inconsistent with preference theory and have broad implications about research priorities within economics. The inconsistency is deeper than the mere lack of transitivity or even stochastic transitivity. It suggests that no optimization principles of any sort lie behind even the simplest of human choices and that the uniformities in human choice behavior that lie behind market behavior may result from principles that are of a completely different sort from those generally accepted. This chapter reports the results of a series of experiments designed to discredit the psychologists' works as applied to economics. The phenomenon is characterized by the following stylized example. Individuals under suitable laboratory conditions are asked if they prefer lottery A to lottery B as shown in Figure 5.1. In lottery A a random dart is thrown to the interior of the circle. If it hits the line, the subject is paid $0, and if it hits anywhere else, the subject is paid $4. Notice that there is a very high probability of winning, so this lottery is called the P bet, standing for probability bet. If lottery B is chosen, a random dart is thrown to the interior of the circle, and the subject receives either $16 or $0, depending on where the dart hits. Lottery B is called the $ bet because there is a very high maximum reward.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Elimination by aspects: A theory of choice
Tversky, A. (1972) · Psychological Review · doi:10.1037/h0032955 · Cited by 3,365
Cited by
Prospect theory: An analysis of decision under risk
Kahneman, D., & Tversky, A. (1988) · Decision, Probability and Utility · doi:10.1017/cbo9780511609220.014 · Cited by 32,474
The Framing of Decisions and the Psychology of Choice
Tversky, A., & Kahneman, D. (1981) · Science · doi:10.1126/science.7455683 · Cited by 18,497
How to Make a Decision: The Analytic Hierarchy Process
Saaty, T. L. (1990) · European Journal of Operational Research · doi:10.1016/0377-2217(90)90057-i · Cited by 9,605
Regret Theory: An Alternative Theory of Rational Choice Under Uncertainty
Loomes, G., & Sugden, R. (1982) · The Economic Journal · doi:10.2307/2232669 · Cited by 4,042
Extensional versus intuitive reasoning: The conjunction fallacy in probability judgment.
Tversky, A., & Kahneman, D. (1983) · Psychological Review · doi:10.1037/0033-295x.90.4.293 · Cited by 3,991
Metadata
- Authors
- Grether, D. M., & Plott, C. R.
- Venue
- The Construction of Preference
- Publisher
- Cambridge University Press
- Published
- 2006-08-28
- Pages
- 77-94
- OpenAlex
- W1566309000
- Cited by
- 1,173
- References
- 1
- FWCI
- 63.32
- Type
- book chapter
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Economic Theory of Choice and the Preference Reversal Phenomenon. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1017/cbo9780511618031.006
- The paper
- Grether, D. M., & Plott, C. R. (2006). Economic Theory of Choice and the Preference Reversal Phenomenon. The Construction of Preference. https://doi.org/10.1017/cbo9780511618031.006
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.