Abstract
ABSTRACTThis paper reports the results of an experiment which investigated the effects of various ways of structuring decision problems under uncertainty (viz, matrix, tree, versus word representations) and various forms of feedback (discussion versus non‐discussion of prepared answers conforming to and deviating from the irrelevance of identical outcomes postulate) on consistent choice behavior (i.e., in accordance with this postulate) in the context of Allais and Morlat‐type (A & M) problems. The special structure of A & M problems is especially useful for studying such behavior in that it presumably leads to a set of choices that violates this fundamental norm of decision theory. The experiment involved 134 industrial management undergraduates who gambled to improve their grades in a statistics course. The results showed that: (1) structuring such problems as “decision trees” or “decision matrices” had either a detrimental or no beneficial effect respectively on the number of consistent responses; while (2) discussion led to some improvement in consistency over no discussion. The implications of the findings for training in rational decision making are discussed.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
