Cited by 410Decision-Making and Behavioral EconomicsEconomic and Environmental ValuationExperimental Behavioral Economics Studies

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 63 of the 63 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

General Evaluability Theory

Hsee, Christopher K., Zhang, Jiao·2010·Perspectives on Psychological Science

DOI 10.1177/1745691610374586

Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

A central question in psychology and economics is the determination of whether individuals react differently to different values of a cared-about attribute (e.g., different income levels, different gas prices, and different ambient temperatures). Building on and significantly extending our earlier work on preference reversals between joint and separate evaluations, we propose a general evaluability theory (GET) that specifies when people are value sensitive and when people mispredict their own or others' value sensitivity. The GET can explain and unify many seemingly unrelated findings, ranging from duration neglect to affective forecasting errors and can generate many new research directions on topics ranging from temporal discounting to subjective well-being.

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

Crossref · 10.1177/1745691610374586

Cites

63 of 63 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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.

Prospect Theory: An Analysis of Decision under Risk
Kahneman, D., & Tversky, A. (1979) · Econometrica · doi:10.2307/1914185 · Cited by 48,524
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
A theory of social comparison processes
Festinger, L. (1954) · Human Relations · doi:10.1177/001872675400700202 · Cited by 20,926
Time Discounting and Time Preference: A Critical Review
Frederick, S., Loewenstein, G., & O’Donoghue, T. (2002) · Journal of Economic Literature · doi:10.1257/002205102320161311 · Cited by 6,106
Will raising the incomes of all increase the happiness of all
Easterlin, R. (1995) · Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization · doi:10.1016/0167-2681(95)00003-b · Cited by 3,202
Relative Income, Happiness, and Utility: An Explanation for the Easterlin Paradox and Other Puzzles
Clark, A. E., Frijters, P., & Shields, M. A. (2008) · Journal of Economic Literature · doi:10.1257/jel.46.1.95 · Cited by 3,159
Adaptation-Level Theory
Parducci, A., & Helson, H. (1965) · The American Journal of Psychology · doi:10.2307/1421107 · Cited by 2,493
Beyond the hedonic treadmill: Revising the adaptation theory of well-being.
Diener, E., Lucas, R. E., & Scollon, C. N. (2006) · American Psychologist · doi:10.1037/0003-066x.61.4.305 · Cited by 1,946
Lottery winners and accident victims: Is happiness relative?
Brickman, P., Coates, D., & Janoff‐Bulman, R. (1978) · Journal of Personality and Social Psychology · doi:10.1037//0022-3514.36.8.917 · Cited by 1,707
Will Money Increase Subjective Well-Being?
Diener, E., & Biswas-Diener, R. (2002) · Social Indicators Research · doi:10.1023/a:1014411319119 · Cited by 1,555

Show all 63 references

Research works printed but not linked: 8

10.5465/amr.1998.533224 · DOI · Paper page
10.1037/0022-3514.36.8.917 · DOI
Cryder C.E., 2008, Paper presented at the Society for Judgment and Decision Making Preconference: Using Human Nature to Improve Human Life
10.1257/jel.40.2.351 · DOI
10.1037/0033-2909.125.5.576 · DOI
Loewenthal D., 1993, Reversals of preference in candidate choice
Stevenson B., 2008, Bookings Papers on Economic Activity, 1
10.1016/j.obhdp.2005.02.003 · DOI

Sorted by citations

Items 201–300 of 410

On having very long arms: how the availability of technological means affects moral cognition
Nagel, J., & Waldmann, M. R. (2016) · Thinking & Reasoning · doi:10.1080/13546783.2015.1114023 · Cited by 5
Risk it? Direct and collateral impacts of peers' verbal expressions about hazard likelihoods*
Windschitl, P. D., Smith, A. R., Scherer, A., & Suls, J. (2017) · Thinking & Reasoning · doi:10.1080/13546783.2017.1307785 · Cited by 4
Examining the effects of lottery-style promotions in casinos
Lucas, A. F. (2018) · International Journal of Hospitality Management · doi:10.1016/j.ijhm.2018.05.001 · Cited by 6
Low‐price guarantees as advertisement strategy and compensation policy: The more, the better?
Haesevoets, T., Hiel, A. V., Onraet, E., Joosten, A., & Cremer, D. D. (2017) · Journal of Consumer Behaviour · doi:10.1002/cb.1639 · Cited by 6
Optimizing Choice Architectures
Schneider, M., DECK, C. A., Shor, M., Besedeš, T., & Sudipta Sarangi, B. (2019) · Decision Analysis · doi:10.1287/deca.2018.0379 · Cited by 6
Misprediction of affective outcomes due to different evaluation modes: Replication and extension of two distinction bias experiments by Hsee and Zhang (2004)
Anvari, F., Olsen, J., Yiu, H. W., & Feldman, G. (2020) · Journal of Experimental Social Psychology · doi:10.1016/j.jesp.2020.104052 · Cited by 6
Implicit Preferences Inferred from ChoicePreprint
Cunningham, T., & de Quidt, J. (2015) · SSRN Electronic Journal · doi:10.2139/ssrn.2709914 · Cited by 5
How Users Assess Privacy Risks in the Internet of Things: The Role of Framing, Comparing, and Educating
Korneeva, E., Salge, T. O., Cichy, P., & Antons, D. (2024) · Business & Society · doi:10.1177/00076503241255082 · Cited by 5
Mitigating the Negative Effect of Overchoice on Purchase Decision: The Role of Product Evaluability
Wang, L., Wang, S., Han, B., & Wang, C. L. (2025) · Psychology and Marketing · doi:10.1002/mar.22241 · Cited by 7
Preference reversal of green tourism products
Li, Y., Peng, L., & Zeng, X. (2025) · International Journal of Hospitality Management · doi:10.1016/j.ijhm.2025.104430 · Cited by 5
Trend effects on perceived avalanche hazard
Terum, J. A., Mannberg, A., & Hovem, F. K. (2022) · Risk Analysis · doi:10.1111/risa.14003 · Cited by 5
A Case Study of the Application of Expected Utility Theory to Everyday Decision Making
Guo, L. (2024) · Highlights in Business Economics and Management · doi:10.54097/vq4sk493 · Cited by 5
Judgements of effort as a function of post-trial versus post-task elicitation
Ashburner, M., & Risko, E. F. (2021) · Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology · doi:10.1177/17470218211005759 · Cited by 5
Objective vs subjective design newness
Sung, B., Hartley, N., Vanman, E. J., & Hooshmand, R. (2021) · Asia Pacific Journal of Marketing and Logistics · doi:10.1108/apjml-12-2020-0897 · Cited by 5
Can the presence of human teacher promote video learning?
Kuang, Z., ZHANG, Y., Wang, F., Xiaomeng, Y. A. N. G., & Xiangen, H. U. (2021) · Advances in Psychological Science · doi:10.3724/sp.j.1042.2021.02184 · Cited by 5
Energy efficiency of consideration sets and choices: the impact of label format
Elsen, M., & Leenheer, J. (2022) · European Journal of Marketing · doi:10.1108/ejm-02-2022-0081 · Cited by 5
The Joint Influence of Evaluation Mode and Benchmark Signal on Environmental Accounting-Relevant Decisions
Alewine, H. C., & Stone, D. N. (2016) · Social and Environmental Accountability Journal · doi:10.1080/0969160x.2016.1149343 · Cited by 5
¿Vale la pena el riesgo? Miedo inducido por el terrorismo a volar
Weiss, D., Jhon, R. S., Rosoff, H., Baumert, T., Buesa, M., Gómez, J. G., Castro, A. V., Shavit, T., & Rosenboim, M. (2016) · Universitas Psychologica · doi:10.11144/javeriana.upsy15-3.wrti · Cited by 5
A Computational Model of Attention Control in Multi-Attribute, Context-Dependent Decision Making
Jung, K., Jeong, J., & Kralik, J. D. (2019) · Frontiers in Computational Neuroscience · doi:10.3389/fncom.2019.00040 · Cited by 6
Towards Recommender Engineering: tools and experiments for identifying recommender differences
Ekstrand, M. D. (2014) · University of Minnesota Digital Conservancy (University of Minnesota) · Cited by 5
Joint versus Separate Modes of Evaluation
Zhang, J. (2015) · Wiley eBooks · doi:10.1002/9781118468333.ch7 · Cited by 4
Self-citation
“The Effort Heuristic” Revisited: Mixed Results for Replications of Kruger et al. (2004)’s Experiments 1 and 2
Ziano, I., Yeung, S. K., Lee, C. S., Shi, J., & Feldman, G. (2023) · Collabra Psychology · doi:10.1525/collabra.87489 · Cited by 4
Consumer Well-Being in Judgment and Decision-Making
Tsai, C. I., Yang, M., & Choi, E. (2024) · International series on consumer science · doi:10.1007/978-3-031-59144-0_18 · Cited by 4
Perceptions of Flight Shame and Consumer Segments in Switzerland
Gunziger, P., Wittmer, A., & Puls, R. (2022) · Management for professionals · doi:10.1007/978-3-030-90895-9_3 · Cited by 4
“R” you getting this? Factors contributing to the public’s understanding, evaluation, and use of basic reproduction numbers for infectious diseases
Vromans, R., Bol, N., van Wezel, M. M. C., & Krahmer, E. (2024) · BMC Public Health · doi:10.1186/s12889-024-18669-6 · Cited by 2
Same but different: Comparative modes of information processing are implicated in the construction of perceptions of autonomy support
Lee, R. R., & Chatzisarantis, N. L. D. (2017) · British Journal of Psychology · doi:10.1111/bjop.12237 · Cited by 4
Unintended CSR Violation Caused by Online Recommendation
Yoon, Y., Fu, Y., & Joo, J. (2021) · Sustainability · doi:10.3390/su13074053 · Cited by 4
Socioeconomic status, communication activity patterns, and subjective well‐being: Evidence from a nationally representative sample in China
Sun, S., & Seo, M. (2022) · Analyses of Social Issues and Public Policy · doi:10.1111/asap.12319 · Cited by 4
Does the evaluability bias hold when giving to animal charities?
Spiteri, G. W. (2022) · Judgment and Decision Making · doi:10.1017/s1930297500009128 · Cited by 4
Short-Asking with Long-Encouraging (SALE): A simple method to increase purchase quantity
Lu, Z. Y., Hsee, C. K., & Wu, K. (2023) · Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science · doi:10.1007/s11747-023-00975-x · Cited by 4
Self-citation
Measurement
Koenig, H. G., VanderWeele, T. J., & Peteet, J. R. (2023) · Oxford University Press eBooks · doi:10.1093/oso/9780190088859.003.0002 · Cited by 5
Predicted Satisfaction from Simultaneous Evaluation of Prosocial and Pro-self Employee Bonus Schemes: Towards a New Form of Management Strategy for Corporate Social Spending
Mukherjee, S., & Sahay, A. (2015) · Psychological Studies · doi:10.1007/s12646-015-0349-z · Cited by 4
Push Outcomes Bias Perceptions of Scratch Card Games
Walker, A. C., Stange, M., Dixon, M. J., Fugelsang, J. A., & Koehler, D. J. (2022) · Journal of Gambling Studies · doi:10.1007/s10899-022-10125-7 · Cited by 4
Marketing Strategies of Mobile Game Application Entrepreneurs
Waller, T., Hockin, R. J., & Smith, G. S. (2017) · International Journal of Applied Management and Technology · doi:10.5590/ijamt.2017.16.1.01 · Cited by 19
The Role of Evaluability Bias and the Fairness Effect in the Escalation of Commitment to Troubled Software ProductDevelopment Projects
Lee, J. S., Keil, M., & Park, S. C. (2019) · Journal of the Association for Information Systems · doi:10.17705/1jais.00585 · Cited by 4
What matters in making demand-based decisions: Time alone or difficulty too?
Janczyk, M., Feghhi, I., & Rosenbaum, D. Α. (2021) · Psychological Research · doi:10.1007/s00426-021-01583-6 · Cited by 4
Asking about and Predicting Consumer Preference: Implications for New Product Development
Joo, J. (2011) · TSpace (University of Toronto) · Cited by 4
Probability or time: Effect of presentation format on continuous risky decisions
Wei, Z., Wang, X., Jia, L.-Q., & Liu, H. (2023) · Judgment and Decision Making · doi:10.1017/jdm.2023.25 · Cited by 3
Shifting Toward Quality: How Communicating “Cost per Wear” Influences Consumer Preference for Clothing
Eckmann, L., & Reisch, L. A. (2025) · Psychology and Marketing · doi:10.1002/mar.70061 · Cited by 3
Contextual effect of social comparison and social evaluation: Insights from the perspective of joint evaluation
Tingting, H. E., Yiman, W. A. N. G., & Chen, W. (2023) · Advances in Psychological Science · doi:10.3724/sp.j.1042.2023.01055 · Cited by 3
Understanding the Religion, Mental, and Social Health Relationship
Koenig, H. G., VanderWeele, T. J., & Peteet, J. R. (2023) · Oxford University Press eBooks · doi:10.1093/oso/9780190088859.003.0016 · Cited by 7
Moral preference reversals: Violations of procedure invariance in moral judgments of sacrificial dilemmas
Landy, J. F., Lemli, B. A., Shah, P., Perry, A. D., & Sager, R. (2024) · Cognition · doi:10.1016/j.cognition.2024.105919 · Cited by 3
Dispositional and Contextual Moderators of Public Outrage Over Outsized Executive Bonuses
Highhouse, S., Wood, N. L., Lake, C. J., & Kirkendall, S. (2014) · Corporate Reputation Review · doi:10.1057/crr.2014.15 · Cited by 3
Adding versus averaging: Evaluability theory applied to job choice decisions
Açıkgöz, Y. (2020) · Journal of Behavioral Decision Making · doi:10.1002/bdm.2186 · Cited by 4
Examining Insensitivity to Probability in Evidence‐Based Communication of Relative Risks: The Role of Affect and Communication Format
Heard, C. L., & Rakow, T. (2021) · Risk Analysis · doi:10.1111/risa.13862 · Cited by 3
The Agent's Impatience: A Self–Other Decision Model of Intertemporal Choices
Yang, A. X., & Urminsky, O. (2023) · Journal of Marketing Research · doi:10.1177/00222437231190851 · Cited by 3
Visual display size and shape impact the accuracy of US adults' health‐risk estimates
Fitzsimmons, C. J., Woodbury, L. H., Taber, J. M., Schiller, L. K., Mielicki, M. K., Sidney, P. G., Coifman, K. G., & Thompson, C. A. (2023) · Journal of Behavioral Decision Making · doi:10.1002/bdm.2341 · Cited by 3
Communicating concrete and abstract product attributes: the role of evaluation mode and inter-attribute trade-offs
Trzebiński, W., Marciniak, B., & Karwowska, J. (2024) · Cogent Business & Management · doi:10.1080/23311975.2024.2306685 · Cited by 3
How to Design Interfaces for Product Recommendation Agents to Influence the Purchase of Environmentally-Friendly Products
Tian, Y., Benbasat, I., & Cenfetelli, R. T. (2016) · Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences (HICSS) · doi:10.1109/hicss.2016.83 · Cited by 3
När är nudges acceptabla? : Påverkan av mottagare, teknik, alternativ och beslutsarkitekter
Hagman, W. (2018) · Linköping studies in behavioural science · doi:10.3384/diss.diva-152788 · Cited by 5
Making sense of performance information on effectiveness, costs, and equality during the COVID-19 pandemic. The importance of reference points for citizens’ performance information use
Mikkelsen, M. F. (2021) · Journal of Behavioral Public Administration · doi:10.30636/jbpa.42.205 · Cited by 3
A Picture Is Worth a Thousand Dollars: Visual Aids Promote Investor Decisions
Scholl, B., Craig, A. W., & Chin, A. (2023) · Journal of the Association for Consumer Research · doi:10.1086/726428 · Cited by 3
Reconsidering Prospect Theory in Health Communication: Interplay of Certainty with Different Types of Framing
Lee, T. K., & Kim, H. K. (2024) · Asian Communication Research · doi:10.20879/acr.2024.21.015 · Cited by 3
All Eyes on Me: The Influence of the Bourbon Label Design on Consumer Willingness-to-Pay
Zhuang, Y., Taylor, S., & Norris, C. L. (2025) · Beverages · doi:10.3390/beverages11040117 · Cited by 2
Size Does Not Matter: Numeracy and the Effect of Quantity Information on Consumers' Price Judgments
Kleber, J., Florack, A., & Peters, E. M. (2025) · Journal of Behavioral Decision Making · doi:10.1002/bdm.70051 · Cited by 2
Online purchasing and household food waste: unpacking the role of value assessment discrepancies from purchase to usage
Tian, Q., Gao, W., Lin, Y., Yu, Y., & Li, C. (2025) · Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services · doi:10.1016/j.jretconser.2025.104594 · Cited by 2
Transparency and Trust in Simple Algorithmic Hiring Procedures
Niessen, A. S. M., & Neumann, M. (2026) · International Journal of Selection and Assessment · doi:10.1111/ijsa.70045 · Cited by 4
The urgency trap: Why emergency services save lives but lose stars
Toscani, G. (2026) · Computers in Human Behavior Reports · doi:10.1016/j.chbr.2026.101211 · Cited by 2
联合评估和单独评估：富有潜力的助推手段
Xi, L. U., & HS, E. (2018) · Acta Psychologica Sinica · doi:10.3724/sp.j.1041.2018.00827 · Cited by 2
Does Reframing Fund Carbon Emissions to Increase Their Personal Relevance Boost Investment in Sustainable Funds? Evidence from a Discrete Choice Conjoint Experimental Design
Gladstone, J. J., Reynolds, J. W., & Ramos, J. (2023) · Journal of the Association for Consumer Research · doi:10.1086/725030 · Cited by 2
Psychological Well-Being and Positive Emotions
Koenig, H. G., VanderWeele, T. J., & Peteet, J. R. (2023) · Oxford University Press eBooks · doi:10.1093/oso/9780190088859.003.0012 · Cited by 2
How the evaluability bias shapes transformative decisions
Zoh, Y., Paul, L. A., & Crockett, M. J. (2024) · Synthese · doi:10.1007/s11229-023-04474-y · Cited by 2
Using Civic Service Design Methods to Redevelop a Data Communication Website With a Health Literacy Lens
Montesano, M., Porter, M., Olson, C., Gettings, C., Torem, E., & Pezeshki, G. (2024) · Journal of Public Health Management and Practice · doi:10.1097/phh.0000000000001912 · Cited by 2
Salience, psychological anchors, and stock return predictability
Lin, M. (2024) · Pacific-Basin Finance Journal · doi:10.1016/j.pacfin.2024.102543 · Cited by 2
A Numeracy-Task interaction model of perceived differences
Villanova, D., & Pandelaere, M. (2024) · Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes · doi:10.1016/j.obhdp.2024.104375 · Cited by 3
Saving Money or Saving Energy? Decision Architecture and Decision Modes to Encourage Energy Saving Behaviors
Forster, H. A. (2020) · doi:10.7916/d8-wbjn-4w80 · Cited by 2
Spatial Distance, Availability of Means, and Moral Obligation Judgments
Nagel, J., & Waldmann, M. R. (2013) · eScholarship (California Digital Library) · Cited by 2
Scale Effects in Moral Relevance Assessment
Nagel, J., & Rybak, A. (2017) · Experimental Psychology (formerly Zeitschrift für Experimentelle Psychologie) · doi:10.1027/1618-3169/a000341 · Cited by 2
Not separate but equal? The impact of multiple-defendant trials on juror decision-making
Wilford, M. M., Horn, M. C. V., Penrod, S., & Greathouse, S. (2017) · Psychology Crime and Law · doi:10.1080/1068316x.2017.1351969 · Cited by 2
Accounting Systems’ Design Matters: Evaluability and Mode Influence Environmental Performance Judgments
Alewine, H. C., & Stone, D. N. (2017) · Emerald Group Publishing Limited eBooks · doi:10.1108/s1475-148820170000020002 · Cited by 2
Preference Reversals Between Joint and Separate Evaluations With Multiple Alternatives and Context Effects
Cheng, Y., Yu, A. P., Huang, M. C.-J., & Dai, C.-J. (2017) · Psychological Reports · doi:10.1177/0033294117718147 · Cited by 2
Comparing What to What, on What Scale? The Impact of Item Comparisons and Reference Points in Communicating Risk and Uncertainty
Rakow, T., Blackshaw, E., Pagel, C., & Spiegelhalter, D. J. (2018) · Journal of Behavioral Decision Making · doi:10.1002/bdm.2073 · Cited by 3
The Motivating-Uncertainty Effect: Uncertainty Increases Resource Investment in the Process of Reward Pursuit
Shen, L., Ayelet Fishbach, B., & Hsee, C. K. (2015) · Cited by 2
Self-citation
Change in Evaluation Mode Can Cause a Cheerleader Effect
Messner, C., Carnelli, M., & Höhener, P. S. (2021) · Frontiers in Psychology · doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2021.607448 · Cited by 2
Nudging Raters towards Feedback: Effects of Regulatory Focus and Idea Partitioning on Rater’s Attendance on and their Tendency to Follow Feedback Information in Idea Selection
Wibmer, A. (2022) · Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences (HICSS) · doi:10.24251/hicss.2022.533 · Cited by 2
The Theoretical Beauty and Fertility of Sampling Approaches
Fiedler, K., Juslin, P., & Denrell, J. C. (2023) · Cambridge University Press eBooks · doi:10.1017/9781009002042.002 · Cited by 2
When do consumers favor overly precise information about investment returns?
Batteux, E., Bilovich, A., Khon, Z., Johnson, S. G. B., & Tuckett, D. (2023) · Journal of Experimental Psychology Applied · doi:10.1037/xap0000465 · Cited by 2
Strategic Decision Facilitation: Supporting Critical Assumptions of the Human in Empirical Modeling of Pairwise Value Comparisons
Kristbaum, J. P., & Ciarallo, F. W. (2020) · Systems · doi:10.3390/systems8030030 · Cited by 2
Why do people pursue goals sequentially when they try to balance cost and utility?
Guath, M., Juslin, P., & Rackwitz, R. (2021) · Journal of Cognitive Psychology · doi:10.1080/20445911.2021.1969941 · Cited by 2
Underlying psychological mechanisms of helping effects: Examining the when × why of charitable giving
Erlandsson, A. (2015) · Lund University Publications (Lund University) · Cited by 2
Decision Factors Considered By Potential Dog Adopters During Shelter Visitation
Minnis, L. E., Davis, D. B., & Loftis, K. E. (2022) · Journal of Applied Animal Welfare Science · doi:10.1080/10888705.2022.2141574 · Cited by 5
Stress Hormones
Koenig, H. G., VanderWeele, T. J., & Peteet, J. R. (2023) · Oxford University Press eBooks · doi:10.1093/oso/9780190088859.003.0025 · Cited by 1
Substance Use and Substance Use Disorders
Koenig, H. G., VanderWeele, T. J., & Peteet, J. R. (2023) · Oxford University Press eBooks · doi:10.1093/oso/9780190088859.003.0010 · Cited by 2
Marital and Family Stability
Koenig, H. G., VanderWeele, T. J., & Peteet, J. R. (2023) · Oxford University Press eBooks · doi:10.1093/oso/9780190088859.003.0014 · Cited by 4
Social Support
Koenig, H. G., VanderWeele, T. J., & Peteet, J. R. (2023) · Oxford University Press eBooks · doi:10.1093/oso/9780190088859.003.0015 · Cited by 1
Designing to elicit future affective potential: Café 2057
Makinde, O., Spackman, C., Rodriguez, A. R., Kuznetsov, S., & Wharton, C. M. (2025) · Futures · doi:10.1016/j.futures.2025.103684 · Cited by 1
Weighing Open Science Against Research Participation Burden in Informed Consent: A Randomized Pilot Study
Iskander, R., Kane, P. B., Sharp, M. E., & Kimmelman, J. (2025) · Journal of Empirical Research on Human Research Ethics · doi:10.1177/15562646251384573 · Cited by 1
Altruistic Behavior in Charitable Giving: a Comparison between Rational, Numerical, and Emotional Prompts
Vieira, C. D. O., Wiegmann, A., & Horvath, J. (2025) · Review of Philosophy and Psychology · doi:10.1007/s13164-025-00785-w · Cited by 1
A Rater‐Reader Inconsistency: Underjudging the Influence of Price in Consumer Ratings
Hsee, T., Zeng, Y., & Hsee, C. K. (2025) · Psychology and Marketing · doi:10.1002/mar.70050 · Cited by 1
Self-citation
Academics’ subjective well-being: the role of academic writing anxiety, academic writing block and cognitive appraisal of writing feedback
Canbulat, A. N. K., & Koparan, B. (2026) · Discover Education · doi:10.1007/s44217-026-01182-w · Cited by 1
The Confidence Boost: How Generative Artificial Intelligence Nudges Consumer Decisions Through Preference Matching
Zhang, Y., Huang, C., Zhang, L., Xinyao, T., Shuai, Q., & Jin, Y. (2026) · Journal of Consumer Behaviour · doi:10.1002/cb.70172 · Cited by 4
The Hedonics of Debt
Shin, F., Cohen, D., Lawless, R. M., & Preston, J. L. (2020) · Frontiers in Psychology · doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2020.537606 · Cited by 2
When two wrongs make a right: The efficiency-consumption gap under separate vs. joint evaluations
Gamliel, E., & Péer, E. (2021) · Judgment and Decision Making · doi:10.1017/s1930297500008317 · Cited by 1
Behavioral Economics and Court Decision-Making
Teichman, D., & Zamir, E. (2021) · Review of Law & Economics · doi:10.1515/rle-2021-0058 · Cited by 8
When do Landscapes with Utility Wires Become Wirescapes?
Yamada, A. (2022) · Transactions of Japan Society of Kansei Engineering · doi:10.5057/jjske.tjske-d-21-00059 · Cited by 1
Kontingenzen
Pfister, H. R., Jungermann, H., & Fischer, K. (2016) · Springer eBooks · doi:10.1007/978-3-662-53038-2_7 · Cited by 2
Misunderstood Menu Metrics: Side-Length Food Sizing Leads to Quantity Underestimation and Overeating
Allard, T., & Puntoni, S. (2022) · Journal of the Association for Consumer Research · doi:10.1086/720445 · Cited by 1
Surprisingness and Occupational Engagement Influence Affective Forecasting in Career-Relevant Contexts
Lu, D., Jiao, R., Li, F., Lin, X., & Yin, H. (2022) · Frontiers in Psychology · doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2022.838765 · Cited by 1
Do people believe that you can have too much money? The relationship between hypothetical lottery wins and expected happiness
Haesevoets, T., Dierckx, K., & Hiel, A. V. (2022) · Judgment and Decision Making · doi:10.1017/s1930297500009402 · Cited by 1
Is intuition better than rationality? The effect of pre-decisional strategy on occupational interest forecasting in Chinese college students
Lu, D., Jiao, R.-K., Li, F., Yin, H., & Lin, X. (2022) · Career Development International · doi:10.1108/cdi-04-2022-0100 · Cited by 1

Authors: Hsee, C. K., & Zhang, J.
Affiliations: University of Chicago (US)
University of Miami (US)
ORCID: Hsee, Christopher K.
Zhang, Jiao
Venue: Perspectives on Psychological Science
Publisher: SAGE Publications
Published: 2010-07
Volume: 5
Issue: 4
Pages: 343-355
ISSN: 1745-6916 (ISSN-L)
1745-6924
DOI: 10.1177/1745691610374586
OpenAlex: W1997137767
Cited by: 410
References: 63
Citations by year: 2026: 20 · 2025: 18 · 2024: 25 · 2023: 68 · 2022: 33 · 2021: 31 · 2020: 22 · 2019: 30 · 2018: 28 · 2017: 26 · 2016: 18 · 2015: 23 · 2014: 24 · 2013: 20 · 2012: 14
FWCI: 1.09
Type: journal article
Language: en
Open access: closed
Licence: journals.sagepub.com/page/policies/text-and-data-mining-license (tdm)
Locations: Perspectives on Psychological Science (publishedVersion)
PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders: John Templeton Foundation
Topics: Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › General Decision Sciences › Decision-Making and Behavioral Economics
Social Sciences › Economics, Econometrics and Finance › Economics and Econometrics › Economic and Environmental Valuation
Social Sciences › Economics, Econometrics and Finance › Economics and Econometrics › Experimental Behavioral Economics Studies
Keywords: value sensitivity, preference reversal, delay discounting, subjective well-being

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

General Evaluability Theory

Abstract

Overview

Integrity signals

Verification

Claims the paper makes

Self-check

Citations

Cites

Cited by

Related

Metadata

Record

About these checks