Eliminating of New Paradoxes of Prospect Theory

doi:10.12005/orms.2022.0263

Abstract

Abstract: The 11 discovered new paradoxes are eliminated of Prospect Theory. First, emotion is introduced into its value and weight functions to get their emotional functions. Then, based on the idea of multi strategy decision, an operational rule set is established. Afterwards, a dual fitting principle is designed to replace the traditional(single) fitting principle. Therefore, the systematic improvement of the original model is completed. By the improvements, not only are the classic choice problems of Prospect Theory fitted, but also these new paradoxes are resolved. These works have verified the rationality and superiority of the improved model.

Key words: Prospect Theory, eliminating paradoxes, emotion, risky decision making

摘要： 为消解前景理论被发现的11个新悖论,首先,将情绪引入它的价值与权重函数,以获取其情绪函数;继而,基于多策略决策思想,建立操作规则集;并设计双重拟合原则代替传统(单重)拟合原则,从而完成对原模型的系统化改进。运用所改进后的模型,不仅实现前景理论典型选择问题的拟合,更对其新悖论进行了消解,从而验证了所改进后模型的合理性和优越性。

关键词: 前景理论, 悖论消解, 情绪, 风险决策

CLC Number:

C934

ZHANG Guo-feng, DU Hu-bin. Eliminating of New Paradoxes of Prospect Theory[J]. Operations Research and Management Science, 2022, 31(8): 143-149.

张国锋, 杜虎兵. 前景理论新悖论的消解[J]. 运筹与管理, 2022, 31(8): 143-149.

References

[1] Borchert D M. Encyclopedia of philosophy[M]. Michigan: Thomson Gale, 2006.
[2] Millroth P, Nilsson H K, Juslin P. The decision paradoxes motivating prospect theory: the prevalence of the paradoxes increases with numerical ability[J]. Judgment and Decision Making, 2019, 14(4): 513-533.
[3] 陈波.悖论研究(第二版)[M].北京:北京大学出版社,2017.
[4] Tversky K A. Prospect theory: an analysis of decision under risk[J]. Econometrica, 1979, 47(2): 263-292.
[5] Allais M. The foundations of a positive theory of choice involving risk and a criticism of the postulates and axioms of the american school(1952)[M]. Springer Netherlands, 1979. 27-145.
[6] Tversky K A, Kahneman D. Advances in prospect theory: cumulative representation of uncertainty[J]. Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, 1992, 5(4): 297-323.
[7] 陈焕之.认知心理学[M].广东:广东教育出版社,2006.
[8] Pedro B, Nicola G, Andrei S. Salience theory of choice under risk[J]. Quarterly Journal of Economics, 2012, 127(3): 1243-1285.
[9] Schmidt U, Starmer C, Sugden R. Third-generation prospect theory[J]. Journal of Risk & Uncertainty, 2008, 36(3): 203-223.
[10] Wang X T, Johnson J G. A tri-reference point theory of decision making under risk[J]. Journal of Experimental Psychology General, 2012, 141(4): 743-756.
[11] Asano M, Basieva I, Khrennikov A, Ohya M, Tanaka Y. A quantum-like model of selection behavior[J]. Journal of Mathematical Psychology, 2017, 78(1): 2-12.
[12] Prietzel T T. The effect of emotion on risky decision making in the context of prospect theory: a comprehensive literature review[J]. Management Review Quarterly, 2020, 70(1): 313-353.
[13] Barberis N C. Thirty years of prospect theory in economics: a review and assessment[J]. Journal of Economic Perspectives, 2012, 27(1): 173-195.
[14] Francis J C. Reformulating prospect theory to become a von neumann-morgenstern theory[J]. Review of Quantitative Finance and Accounting, 2020, 55(2): 1-21.
[15] Birnbaum M H, New paradoxes of risky decision making[J]. Psychological Review, 2008, 115(2): 463-501.
[16] Birnbaum M H. Testing a class of models that includes majority rule and regret theories: transitivity, recycling, and restricted branch independence[J]. Decision, 2015, 2(3): 145-190.
[17] 陈璟,姜金栋,汪为,等.决策中情绪作用机制的理论研究述评[J].心理科学,2014,37(6):1346-1353.
[18] 刘晓东,刘力臻.预期情绪动机观与经济决策悖论问题的消解[J].当代经济研究,2017,261(7):52-58.
[19] Mohnert F, Pachur T, Lieder F. What's in the adaptive toolbox and how do people choose from it? rational models of strategy selection in risky choice[C]. in 41st Annual Meeting of the Cognitive Science Society, 2019. Montreal, Canada.
[20] 张国锋,王牛,熊虎.情绪博弈的行为计算原理[J].系统仿真学报,2015,27(1):29-36.
[21] Tang H, Liang Z, Zhou K, Huang G H, Rao L L, Li S. Positive and negative affect in loss aversion: additive or subtractive logic?[J]. Journal of Behavioral Decision Making, 2016, 29(4): 381-391.
[22] Francis G, Galotti K. Cognitive psychology in and out of the laboratory[M]. London: SAGE Publications, 2014.
[23] Bayrak O K, Hey J D. Understanding preference imprecision[J]. Journal of Economic Surveys, 2020, 34(1): 154-174.
[24] 周蕾,李纾,许燕,梁竹苑.决策风格的理论发展及建构:基于信息加工视角[J].心理科学进展,2014,22(1):112-121.