2020
DOI: 10.1016/j.heliyon.2020.e05643
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

The improving sequence effect on monetary sequences

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1

Citation Types

0
1
0

Year Published

2021
2021
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
3

Relationship

0
3

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 3 publications
(1 citation statement)
references
References 35 publications
(102 reference statements)
0
1
0
Order By: Relevance
“…For positive series of future rewards such as incomes, restaurant visits, leisure activities or other gains, the preference for improvement means that individuals prefer to start with the least attractive outcome and end with the most attractive outcome than the opposite, i.e., they prefer the rising sequence over the falling sequence adding up to the same total amount Prelec, 1991, 1993;Loewenstein and Sicherman, 1991;Gigliotti and Sopher, 1997;Thaler, 1999;Matsumoto et al, 2000;Guyse et al, 2002;Duffy and Smith, 2013;Duxbury et al, 2013). Likewise, for negative series of outcomes such as pains, annoying noise, discomfort or other losses, individuals prefer the falling sequence over the rising sequence (Ariely and Loewenstein, 2000;Ariely and Zauberman, 2000;Langer et al, 2005;Rambaud et al, 2018;Garcia et al, 2020). Some researchers examined human preferences for sequences with respect to loan repayment plans.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…For positive series of future rewards such as incomes, restaurant visits, leisure activities or other gains, the preference for improvement means that individuals prefer to start with the least attractive outcome and end with the most attractive outcome than the opposite, i.e., they prefer the rising sequence over the falling sequence adding up to the same total amount Prelec, 1991, 1993;Loewenstein and Sicherman, 1991;Gigliotti and Sopher, 1997;Thaler, 1999;Matsumoto et al, 2000;Guyse et al, 2002;Duffy and Smith, 2013;Duxbury et al, 2013). Likewise, for negative series of outcomes such as pains, annoying noise, discomfort or other losses, individuals prefer the falling sequence over the rising sequence (Ariely and Loewenstein, 2000;Ariely and Zauberman, 2000;Langer et al, 2005;Rambaud et al, 2018;Garcia et al, 2020). Some researchers examined human preferences for sequences with respect to loan repayment plans.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%