The use of expected value in pricing judgments

Gary Colbert, Dennis Murray and Robert Nieschwietz

Journal of Risk Research, 2009, vol. 12, issue 2, 199-208

Abstract: Previous research has examined the extent to which decisions made in binary choice situations are consistent with expected value. Li (2003) reports that decisions in multiple-play gambles are well explained by expected value, while single-play gambles are not consistent with expected value. The present study extends previous work by examining the use of expected value in the pricing of gambles. The results show that subjects' pricing decisions are much more consistent with expected value in multiple-play situations than in single-play situations, particularly when the subjects are provided with a simple decision aid (i.e. a very brief description of expected value and the calculated amount of the expected value). Additionally, substantially fewer subjects in our study made decisions consistent with expected value than in Li's (2003) study, suggesting that binary choice studies may overstate the extent of expected value usage.

Date: 2009
References: View references in EconPapers View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations: View citations in EconPapers (1)

Downloads: (external link)
http://hdl.handle.net/10.1080/13669870802488925 (text/html)
Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:taf:jriskr:v:12:y:2009:i:2:p:199-208

Ordering information: This journal article can be ordered from
http://www.tandfonline.com/pricing/journal/RJRR20

DOI: 10.1080/13669870802488925

Access Statistics for this article

Journal of Risk Research is currently edited by Bryan MacGregor

More articles in Journal of Risk Research from Taylor & Francis Journals
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Chris Longhurst ().