2021
DOI: 10.1016/j.jesp.2021.104177
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

On prospect theory, making choices for others, and the affective psychology of risk

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1

Citation Types

0
5
0

Year Published

2022
2022
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
6

Relationship

1
5

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 10 publications
(5 citation statements)
references
References 76 publications
0
5
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Using a good market economic system to create greater wealth for the society, through the static inspection system helps to enhance the public's legal awareness. (as shown in Figure 8 ) [ 11 ].…”
Section: Cultivation and Development Of Public Legal Consciousnessmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Using a good market economic system to create greater wealth for the society, through the static inspection system helps to enhance the public's legal awareness. (as shown in Figure 8 ) [ 11 ].…”
Section: Cultivation and Development Of Public Legal Consciousnessmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Similarly, people may be more willing to accept the moral risk associated with using an anti-charity contract (i.e., potential donations to a hated organization) for another person than when choosing for themselves, possibly because they underweight negative emotions like regret when choosing for others (Kray, 2000). Decision makers may also give greater weight to pragmatic considerations, such as the effectiveness of a contract, when choosing for others than themselves (Stone et al, 2013;Stone and Allgaier, 2008;Sun et al, 2021). Similarly, individuals tend to view others as less ethical than themselves (Allison et al, 1989;Epley and Dunning, 2000) and may be relatively less concerned with the moral inappropriateness of an anticharity contract when choosing for others.…”
Section: Studymentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In Study 5, we exploit natural variation in psychological distance by asking participants to select a commitment contract either for themselves, for a stranger, or for a close friend (Aron et al, 1991;Faro and Rottenstreich, 2006;Kim et al, 2013;Sun et al, 2021). If individuals are especially likely to view anti-charity contracts as effective for others because those individuals are psychologically distant from oneself, then we should expect the self-other difference in contract choice to largely disappear when choosing contracts for close others.…”
Section: Studymentioning
confidence: 99%
“…People make risk‐involving decisions for others on a daily basis and across various domains. Considerable insight has been gained over the years into how people handle risk when choosing for others (Liu & Baskin, 2021; Sun et al, 2021; see Polman & Wu, 2020 for a meta‐analysis). One aspect that has remained unexplored, however, concerns the potential role played by the emotional state of the choice recipient.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%