The DOI matches its Crossref record; 3 of the 3 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Context-Dependent Preferences
Abstract
The standard theory of choice—based on value maximization—associates with each option a real value such that, given an offered set, the decision maker chooses the option with the highest value. Despite its simplicity and intuitive appeal, there is a growing body of data that is inconsistent with this theory. In particular, the relative attractiveness of x compared to y often depends on the presence or absence of a third option z, and the “market share” of an option can actually be increased by enlarging the offered set. We review recent empirical findings that are inconsistent with value maximization, and present a context-dependent model that expresses the value of each option as an additive combination of two components: a contingent weighting process that captures the effect of the background context, and a binary comparison process that describes the effect of the local context. The model accounts for observed violations of the standard theory and provides a framework for analyzing context-dependent preferences.
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
Loss aversion in riskless choice: A reference-dependent model.
Tversky, A., & Kahneman, D. (1991) · The Quarterly Journal of Economics · doi:10.2307/2937956 · Cited by 6,432
Self-citationAnomalies: The Endowment Effect, Loss Aversion, and Status Quo Bias
Kahneman, D., Knetsch, J. L., & Thaler, R. H. (1991) · Journal of Economic Perspectives · doi:10.1257/jep.5.1.193 · Cited by 5,019
Elimination by aspects: A theory of choice
Tversky, A. (1972) · Psychological Review · doi:10.1037/h0032955 · Cited by 3,365
Self-citation
Cited by
Do Investors Value Sustainability? A Natural Experiment Examining Ranking and Fund Flows
HARTZMARK, S. M., & SUSSMAN, A. B. (2019) · The Journal of Finance · doi:10.1111/jofi.12841 · Cited by 1,711
Shafir, E. (1993) · Cognition · doi:10.1016/0010-0277(93)90034-s · Cited by 1,453
Multialternative decision field theory: A dynamic connectionst model of decision making.
Roe, R. M., Busemeyer, J. R., & Townsend, J. T. (2001) · Psychological Review · doi:10.1037/0033-295x.108.2.370 · Cited by 758
Neurobiology of economic choice: a good-based model
Padoa-Schioppa, C. (2011) · Annual Review of Neuroscience · doi:10.1146/annurev-neuro-061010-113648 · Cited by 600
Rudebeck, P. H., & Murray, E. A. (2014) · Neuron · doi:10.1016/j.neuron.2014.10.049 · Cited by 405
Metadata
- Authors
- Tversky, A., & Simonson, I.
- Venue
- Management Science
- Published
- 1993-10
- Volume
- 39
- Issue
- 10
- Pages
- 1179-1189
- ISSN
- 0025-1909 (ISSN-L)
- 1526-5501
- OpenAlex
- W2071500925
- Cited by
- 1,290
- References
- 3
- FWCI
- 3.80
- Type
- journal article
- 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: Context-Dependent Preferences. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1287/mnsc.39.10.1179
- The paper
- Tversky, A., & Simonson, I. (1993). Context-Dependent Preferences. Management Science. https://doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.39.10.1179
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.