The DOI matches its Crossref record; 103 of the 104 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
A dual system model of preferences under risk
Abstract
This article presents a dual system model (DSM) of decision making under risk and uncertainty according to which the value of a gamble is a combination of the values assigned to it independently by the affective and deliberative systems. On the basis of research on dual process theories and empirical research in Hsee and Rottenstreich (2004) and Rottenstreich and Hsee (2001) among others, the DSM incorporates (a) individual differences in disposition to rational versus emotional decision making, (b) the affective nature of outcomes, and (c) different task construals within its framework. The model has good descriptive validity and accounts for (a) violation of nontransparent stochastic dominance, (b) fourfold pattern of risk attitudes, (c) ambiguity aversion, (d) common consequence effect, (e) common ratio effect, (f) isolation effect, and (g) coalescing and event-splitting effects. The DSM is also used to make several novel predictions of conditions under which specific behavior patterns may or may not occur.
Overview
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
In the citing paper
“As with autonomic function, arousal states can habituate if the appetitive behaviors become routine, leading to less potent gratification and a dampening of mesolimbic dopamine response over time.”
From Assessment and treatment of compulsive sexual behavior disorder: a sexual medicine perspective (2024) · cites this paper as [92]
Citations
Cites
Prospect theory: An analysis of decision under risk
Kahneman, D. J., & Tversky, A. (1988) · Cambridge University Press eBooks · doi:10.1017/cbo9780511609220.014 · Cited by 32,720
Theory of games and economic behavior
Garcia, S. R., & Miller, S. J. (2019) · American Mathematical Society eBooks · doi:10.1090/mbk/121/32 · Cited by 16,777
Advances in prospect theory: Cumulative representation of uncertainty
Tversky, A., & Kahneman, D. (1992) · Journal of Risk and Uncertainty · doi:10.1007/bf00122574 · Cited by 15,467
(1994) · DigitalGeorgetown (Georgetown University Library) · Cited by 10,542
“Risk, Ambiguity, and the Savage Axioms.”
Ellsberg, D. (1961) · The Quarterly Journal of Economics · doi:10.2307/1884324 · Cited by 7,891
Anderson, N. H. (2001) · Psychology Press eBooks · doi:10.4324/9781410600004-24 · Cited by 6,939
(1999) · Cited by 6,104
Loewenstein, G. F., Weber, E. U., Hsee, C. K., & Welch, N. (2001) · Psychological Bulletin · doi:10.1037/0033-2909.127.2.267 · Cited by 5,955
Kahneman, D. J., & Tversky, A. (2013) · World Scientific handbook in financial economic series · doi:10.1142/9789814417358_0016 · Cited by 5,379
Maps of Bounded Rationality: Psychology for Behavioral Economics
Kahneman, D. (2003) · American Economic Review · doi:10.1257/000282803322655392 · Cited by 5,377
Cacioppo, J. T., & Petty, R. E. (1982) · Journal of Personality and Social Psychology · doi:10.1037/0022-3514.42.1.116 · Cited by 5,359
Individual differences in reasoning: Implications for the rationality debate?
Stanovich, K. E., & West, R. F. (2000) · Behavioral and Brain Sciences · doi:10.1017/s0140525x00003435 · Cited by 4,481
The Emotional Brain: The Mysterious Underpinnings of Emotional Life
LeDoux, J. E. (2004) · Medical Entomology and Zoology · Cited by 4,212
The empirical case for two systems of reasoning.
Sloman, S. A. (1996) · Psychological Bulletin · doi:10.1037/0033-2909.119.1.3 · Cited by 3,942
RATIONAL CHOICE AND THE FRAMING OF DECISIONS
Tversky, A., & Kahneman, D. J. (1988) · Cambridge University Press eBooks · doi:10.1017/cbo9780511598951.011 · Cited by 3,733
The Utility Analysis of Choices Involving Risk
Friedman, M., & Savage, L. J. (1948) · Journal of Political Economy · doi:10.1086/256692 · Cited by 3,086
Integration of the cognitive and the psychodynamic unconscious
Epstein, S. (1994) · American Psychologist · doi:10.1037/0003-066x.49.8.709 · Cited by 2,883 · cited 1×
“There are several dual process theories (Deutsch & Strack, 2006; Epstein, 1973, 1994; Evans & Over, 1996; Hammond, 1996; Hogarth, 2005; Klein, 1998; Levinson, 1995; Pollock, 1991; Reber, 1993; Sloman, 1996; E. R. Smith & DeCoster, 2000) with considerable overlap of content and structure (see…”
Subjective probability and expected utility without additivity
Schmeidler, D. (2004) · Routledge eBooks · doi:10.4324/9780203358061-10 · Cited by 2,497
Slovic, P., Finucane, M., Peters, E., & MacGregor, D. G. (2002) · Heuristics and Biases · doi:10.1017/cbo9780511808098.025 · Cited by 2,349
An economic theory of self-control.
Thaler, R. H., & Shefrin, H. M. (1981) · Journal of Political Economy · doi:10.1086/260971 · Cited by 2,203
Sources of Power: How People Make Decisions
Klein, G. A., & Sullivan, J. P. (2001) · Leadership and Management in Engineering · doi:10.1061/(asce)1532-6748(2001)1:1(21 · Cited by 2,159
Implicit Learning and Tacit Knowledge
Reber, A. S. (2003) · The MIT Press eBooks · doi:10.7551/mitpress/2834.003.0047 · Cited by 2,013
A Smooth Model of Decision Making under Ambiguity
Klibanoff, P., Marinacci, M., & Mukerji, S. (2005) · Econometrica · doi:10.1111/j.1468-0262.2005.00640.x · Cited by 1,973
Individual differences in intuitive-experiential and analytical-rational thinking styles.
Epstein, S. J., Pacini, R., Denes-Raj, V., & Heier, H. (1996) · Journal of Personality and Social Psychology · doi:10.1037/0022-3514.71.2.390 · Cited by 1,928
Markowitz, H. M. (1952) · Journal of Political Economy · doi:10.1086/257177 · Cited by 1,814
Smith, E. R., & DeCoster, J. (2000) · Personality and Social Psychology Review · doi:10.1207/s15327957pspr0402_01 · Cited by 1,776
An Economic Theory of Self-Control
Shefrin, H., & Thaler, R. H. (1977) · National Bureau of Economic Research · doi:10.3386/w0208 · Cited by 1,596
"Expected Utility" Analysis without the Independence Axiom
Machina, M. J. (1982) · Econometrica · doi:10.2307/1912631 · Cited by 1,519
On the Shape of the Probability Weighting Function
Gonzalez, R., & Wu, G. (1999) · Cognitive Psychology · doi:10.1006/cogp.1998.0710 · Cited by 1,396
The self-concept revisited: Or a theory of a theory.
Epstein, S. J. (1973) · American Psychologist · doi:10.1037/h0034679 · Cited by 1,290
Contingent Valuation: A Critical Assessment
Hausman, J. A. (1993) · Emerald Group Publishing Limited eBooks · doi:10.1108/s0573-8555(1993)220 · Cited by 1,131
PROBABILITY WEIGHTING FUNCTIONPreprint
al‐Nowaihi, A., & Dhami, S. (2005) · SSRN Electronic Journal · Cited by 1,077
(1997) · Choice Reviews Online · doi:10.5860/choice.34-5974 · Cited by 1,076
Curvature of the Probability Weighting Function
Wu, G. Y., & Gonzalez, R. (1996) · Management Science · doi:10.1287/mnsc.42.12.1676 · Cited by 1,021
Weighing risk and uncertainty.
Tversky, A., & Fox, C. R. (1995) · Psychological Review · doi:10.1037/0033-295x.102.2.269 · Cited by 995
A Dual-Self Model of Impulse Control
Fudenberg, D., & Levine, D. K. (2006) · American Economic Review · doi:10.1257/aer.96.5.1449 · Cited by 951
Parameter-Free Elicitation of Utility and Probability Weighting Functions
Abdellaoui, M. (2000) · Management Science · doi:10.1287/mnsc.46.11.1497.12080 · Cited by 917
Individual differences in rational thought.
Stanovich, K. E., & West, R. F. (1998) · Journal of Experimental Psychology General · doi:10.1037/0096-3445.127.2.161 · Cited by 886
Human Judgment and Social Policy: Irreducible Uncertainty, Inevitable Error, Unavoidable Injustice
Hammond, K. R. (1996) · doi:10.1093/oso/9780195097344.001.0001 · Cited by 851
Money, Kisses, and Electric Shocks: On the Affective Psychology of Risk
Rottenstreich, Y., & Hsee, C. K. (2001) · Psychological Science · doi:10.1111/1467-9280.00334 · Cited by 825
Cognitive‐Experiential Self‐Theory of Personality
Epstein, S. J. (2003) · Wiley eBooks · doi:10.1002/0471264385.wei0507 · Cited by 664
Music, Pandas, and Muggers: On the Affective Psychology of Value.
Hsee, C. K., & Rottenstreich, Y. (2004) · Journal of Experimental Psychology: General · doi:10.1037/0096-3445.133.1.23 · Cited by 654
Loewenstein, G. F., & Elster, J. (1992) · Medical Entomology and Zoology · Cited by 635
Decision Making Under Ambiguity
Einhorn, H. J., & Hogarth, R. M. (1986) · The Journal of Business · doi:10.1086/296364 · Cited by 633
Slovic, P., & Tversky, A. (1974) · Systems Research and Behavioral Science · doi:10.1002/bs.3830190603 · Cited by 609
Neuroeconomics: cross-currents in research on decision-making
Sanfey, A. G., Loewenstein, G. F., McClure, S. M., & Cohen, J. D. (2006) · Trends in Cognitive Sciences · doi:10.1016/j.tics.2006.01.009 · Cited by 571
Economic Preferences or Attitude Expressions?: An Analysis of Dollar Responses to Public Issues
Kahneman, D. J., Ritov, I., Schkade, D. A., Sherman, S. J., & Varian, H. R. (1999) · Springer eBooks · doi:10.1007/978-94-017-1406-8_8 · Cited by 515
Slovic, P., Monahan, J. T., & MacGregor, D. G. (2000) · Law and Human Behavior · doi:10.1023/a:1005595519944 · Cited by 502
A Parameter-Free Elicitation of the Probability Weighting Function in Medical Decision Analysis
Bleichrodt, H., & Prades, J. L. P. (2000) · Management Science · doi:10.1287/mnsc.46.11.1485.12086 · Cited by 473
Frisch, D., & Baron, J. (1988) · Journal of Behavioral Decision Making · doi:10.1002/bdm.3960010303 · Cited by 469
The Ellsberg Paradox and Risk Aversion: An Anticipated Utility Approach
Segal, U. (1987) · International Economic Review · doi:10.2307/2526866 · Cited by 435
Risk aversion in the theory of expected utility with rank dependent probabilities
Chew, S. H., Karni, E., & Safra, Z. (1987) · Journal of Economic Theory · doi:10.1016/0022-0531(87)90093-7 · Cited by 430
Utility Theory: Axioms Versus ‘Paradoxes’
MacCrimmon, K. R., & Larsson, S. (1979) · Springer eBooks · doi:10.1007/978-94-015-7629-1_15 · Cited by 412
TWO‐PIECE VON NEUMANN‐MORGENSTERN UTILITY FUNCTIONS*
Fishburn, P. C., & Kochenberger, G. A. (1979) · Decision Sciences · doi:10.1111/j.1540-5915.1979.tb00043.x · Cited by 397
Animal Spirits: Affective and Deliberative Processes in Economic BehaviorPreprint
Loewenstein, G. F., & O’Donoghue, T. (2004) · SSRN Electronic Journal · doi:10.2139/ssrn.539843 · Cited by 395
Lopes, L. L., & Oden, G. C. (1999) · Journal of Mathematical Psychology · doi:10.1006/jmps.1999.1259 · Cited by 383
What Price Ambiguity? or the Role of Ambiguity in Decision-Making
Becker, S. W., & Brownson, F. O. (1964) · Journal of Political Economy · doi:10.1086/258854 · Cited by 374
Prospective reference theory: Toward an explanation of the paradoxes
Viscusi, W. K. (1989) · Journal of Risk and Uncertainty · doi:10.1007/bf00209389 · Cited by 363
Modeling Ambiguity in Decisions Under Uncertainty
Kahn, B. E., & Sarin, R. K. (1988) · Journal of Consumer Research · doi:10.1086/209163 · Cited by 359
Time-dependent gambling: Odds now, money later.
Sagristano, M. D., Trope, Y., & Liberman, N. (2002) · Journal of Experimental Psychology General · doi:10.1037/0096-3445.131.3.364 · Cited by 346
Personality and social psychology
Millon, T., & Lerner, M. J. (2003) · Cited by 341
Measuring Natural Resource Damages with Contingent Valuation: Tests of Validity and Reliability
Desvousges, W. H., Johnson, F. R., DUNFORD, R. W., Hudson, S. P., Wilson, K. N., & Boyle, K. (1993) · Contributions to economic analysis · doi:10.1016/b978-0-444-81469-2.50009-2 · Cited by 339
Venture Theory: A Model of Decision Weights
Hogarth, R. M., & Einhorn, H. J. (1990) · Management Science · doi:10.1287/mnsc.36.7.780 · Cited by 337
On the subjective probability of compound events
Bar‐Hillel, M. (1973) · Organizational Behavior and Human Performance · doi:10.1016/0030-5073(73)90061-5 · Cited by 331
An Experimental Study of the Auction-Value of an Uncertain Outcome
Preston, M. G., & Baratta, P. (1948) · The American Journal of Psychology · doi:10.2307/1416964 · Cited by 326
Interactional biases in human thinking
Levinson, S. C. (1995) · Cambridge University Press eBooks · doi:10.1017/cbo9780511621710.014 · Cited by 319
Rank- and sign-dependent linear utility models for finite first-order gambles
Luce, R. D., & Fishburn, P. C. (1991) · Journal of Risk and Uncertainty · doi:10.1007/bf00057885 · Cited by 305
Utility Theories: Measurements and Applications
(1992) · Studies in risk and uncertainty · doi:10.1007/978-94-011-2952-7 · Cited by 276
Uncertainty Aversion with Second-Order Utilities and Probabilities
Nau, R. F. (2006) · Management Science · doi:10.1287/mnsc.1050.0469 · Cited by 273
Three Variants on the Allais Example
Conlisk, J. (1989) · American Economic Review · Cited by 272
Testing for juxtaposition and event-splitting effects
Starmer, C., & Sugden, R. (1993) · Journal of Risk and Uncertainty · doi:10.1007/bf01072613 · Cited by 264
What Determines the Shape of the Probability Weighting Function Under Uncertainty?
Kilka, M., & Weber, M. (2001) · Management Science · doi:10.1287/mnsc.47.12.1712.10239 · Cited by 240
TARGET ARTICLE: Duality Models in Social Psychology: From Dual Processes to Interacting Systems
Deutsch, R., & Strack, F. (2006) · Psychological Inquiry · doi:10.1207/s15327965pli1703_2 · Cited by 229
Choice, Decision, and Measurement: Essays in Honor of R. Duncan Luce
(2019) · Routledge eBooks · doi:10.4324/9781315789408 · Cited by 209
The Routines of Decision Making
(2014) · Psychology Press eBooks · doi:10.4324/9781410611826 · Cited by 205
The center and range of the probability interval as factors affecting ambiguity preferences
Curley, S. P., & Yates, J. F. (1985) · Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes · doi:10.1016/0749-5978(85)90016-0 · Cited by 183
Scope (in)sensitivity in elicited valuations
Frederick, S. W., & Fischhoff, B. (1998) · Risk Decision and Policy · doi:10.1080/135753098348239 · Cited by 167
The Effect of Decision Strategy on Deciding to Defer Choice
Dhar, R. (1996) · Journal of Behavioral Decision Making · doi:10.1002/(sici)1099-0771(199612)9:4 · Cited by 158
Baron, J., & Greene, J. D. (1996) · Journal of Experimental Psychology Applied · doi:10.1037/1076-898x.2.2.107 · Cited by 147
Gain/Loss Asymmetry in Risky Intertemporal Choice
Shelley, M. K. (1994) · Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes · doi:10.1006/obhd.1994.1053 · Cited by 143
An empirical evaluation of descriptive models of ambiguity reactions in choice situations
Curley, S. P., & Yates, J. F. (1989) · Journal of Mathematical Psychology · doi:10.1016/0022-2496(89)90019-9 · Cited by 127
Individual behavior under risk and under uncertainty: An experimental study
Cohen, M., Jaffray, J., & Saïd, T. (1985) · Theory and Decision · doi:10.1007/bf00134074 · Cited by 121
Affect, Empathy, and Regressive Mispredictions of Others’ Preferences Under Risk
Faro, D., & Rottenstreich, Y. (2006) · Management Science · doi:10.1287/mnsc.1050.0490 · Cited by 120
Hogarth, R. M. (2014) · SSRN Electronic Journal · doi:10.4324/9781410611826-11 · Cited by 119
Becker, J. L., & Sarin, R. K. (1987) · Management Science · doi:10.1287/mnsc.33.11.1367 · Cited by 115
Fildes, R. A. (1988) · International Journal of Forecasting · doi:10.1016/0169-2070(88)90123-9 · Cited by 113
Attitudes to risk and attitudes to uncertainty: experimental evidence
Mauro, C. D., & Maffioletti, A. (2004) · Applied Economics · doi:10.1080/00036840410001674286 · Cited by 106
Risk tolerance in the present and the future: an experimental study
NOUSSAIR, C. N., & Wu, P. C. (2006) · Managerial and Decision Economics · doi:10.1002/mde.1278 · Cited by 97
Violations of Monotonicity in Judgment and Decision Making
Birnbaum, M. H. (2019) · Choice, Decision, and Measurement: Essays in Honor of R. Duncan Luce · doi:10.4324/9781315789408-6 · Cited by 85
Hogarth, R. M. (2002) · RePEc: Research Papers in Economics · Cited by 76
Personal probabilities of probabilities
Marschak, J., DeGroot, M. H., Marschak, J., Borch, K. H., Chernoff, H., Groot, M. D., Dorfman, R., Edwards, W., Ferguson, T. S., Miyasawa, K., et al. (1975) · Theory and Decision · doi:10.1007/bf00169102 · Cited by 68
OSCAR: a general theory of rationality
Pollock, J. L. (1989) · Journal of Experimental & Theoretical Artificial Intelligence · doi:10.1080/09528138908953702 · Cited by 65
Failures of the reduction principle in an Ellsberg-type problem
Bernasconi, M., & Loomes, G. (1992) · Theory and Decision · doi:10.1007/bf00133629 · Cited by 64
Birnbaum, M. H. (2005) · Journal of Risk and Uncertainty · doi:10.1007/s11166-005-5103-9 · Cited by 62
Philosophy and AI: Essays at the Interface
Cummins, R., & Pollack, J. S. (1991) · Cited by 45
Exploring the external validity of a subjectively weighted utility model of decision making
Larson, J. R. (1980) · Organizational Behavior and Human Performance · doi:10.1016/0030-5073(80)90069-0 · Cited by 36
Testing of the ‘reduction of compound alternatives’ principle
Keller, L. R. (1985) · Omega · doi:10.1016/0305-0483(85)90031-3 · Cited by 29
Effects of some probability displays on choices
Ronen, J. (1973) · Organizational Behavior and Human Performance · doi:10.1016/0030-5073(73)90032-9 · Cited by 26
Exploring Ellsberg’s Paradox in Vague-Vague Cases
Kramer, K. M., & Budescu, D. V. (2007) · Springer eBooks · doi:10.1007/0-387-24244-9_6 · Cited by 13
Affective Decision Making and the Ellsberg ParadoxPreprint
Bracha, A., & Brown, D. J. (2008) · SSRN Electronic Journal · doi:10.2139/ssrn.1220562 · Cited by 2
Marketing, accounting and cognitive perspectives
Zwick, R., & Rapoport, A. (2005) · Springer eBooks · Cited by 2
A Context Dependent Model of Decision Making Under RiskPreprint
Mukherjee, K. (2008) · SSRN Electronic Journal · doi:10.2139/ssrn.1136775 · Cited by 1
Self-citation
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Schildberg-Hörisch, H. (2018) · The Journal of Economic Perspectives · doi:10.1257/jep.32.2.135 · Cited by 483
Dual processes in decision making and developmental neuroscience: A fuzzy-trace model
Reyna, V. F., & Brainerd, C. J. (2011) · Developmental Review · doi:10.1016/j.dr.2011.07.004 · Cited by 393
“Recently, scholars have proposed dual-process models in which processing conformed either to expected value (or expected utility) versus prospect theory (e.g., Loewenstein & O'Donoghue, 2005; Mukherjee, 2010).”
BackgroundThe effect of cognitive load on economic decision making: A survey and new experiments
Deck, C., & Jahedi, S. (2015) · European Economic Review · doi:10.1016/j.euroecorev.2015.05.004 · Cited by 304
Emotion and decision-making: affect-driven belief systems in anxiety and depression
Paulus, M. P., & Yu, A. J. (2012) · Trends in Cognitive Sciences · doi:10.1016/j.tics.2012.07.009 · Cited by 287
Enke, B., & Graeber, T. W. (2023) · The Quarterly Journal of Economics · doi:10.1093/qje/qjad025 · Cited by 262
Metadata
- Authors
- Mukherjee, K.
- Affiliations
- INSEAD (SG)
- Corresponding author
- Mukherjee, Kanchan
- Venue
- Psychological Review
- Published
- 2010
- Volume
- 117
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 243-255
- ISSN
- 0033-295X (ISSN-L)
- 1939-1471
- OpenAlex
- W1996734429
- Cited by
- 198
- References
- 104
- Citations by year
- 2026: 7 · 2025: 13 · 2024: 12 · 2023: 21 · 2022: 10 · 2021: 11 · 2020: 21 · 2019: 8 · 2018: 7 · 2017: 17 · 2016: 12 · 2015: 22 · 2014: 11 · 2013: 11 · 2012: 10
- FWCI
- 6.03
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Psychological Review (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Funders
- Centre for Decision Making and Risk Analysis
- INSEAD
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › General Decision Sciences › Decision-Making and Behavioral Economics
- Social Sciences › Economics, Econometrics and Finance › Economics and Econometrics › Experimental Behavioral Economics Studies
- Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Neural and Behavioral Psychology Studies
- Keywords
- dual-process models, decision making under risk, decision making under uncertainty, dual-process theory, ambiguity aversion, common ratio effect, isolation effect, preference elicitation
- MeSH terms
- Affect, Attitude, Choice Behavior, Decision Making, Humans, Models, Psychological, Risk-Taking
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
