Multiple-Stage Decision-Making: The Effect of Planning Horizon Length on Dynamic Consistency
Purchase on Springer.com
$39.95 / €34.95 / £29.95*
Rent the article at a discountRent now
* Final gross prices may vary according to local VAT.
Many decisions involve multiple stages of choices and events, and these decisions can be represented graphically as decision trees. Optimal decision strategies for decision trees are commonly determined by a backward induction analysis that demands adherence to three fundamental consistency principles: dynamic, consequential, and strategic. Previous research (Busemeyer et al. 2000, J. Exp. Psychol. Gen. 129, 530) found that decision-makers tend to exhibit violations of dynamic and strategic consistency at rates significantly higher than choice inconsistency across various levels of potential reward. The current research extends these findings under new conditions; specifically, it explores the extent to which these principles are violated as a function of the planning horizon length of the decision tree. Results from two experiments suggest that dynamic inconsistency increases as tree length increases; these results are explained within a dynamic approach–avoidance framework.
- Bar-Hillel, M. (1980), The base-rate fallacy in probability judgments, Acta Psychologica 44, 211-233. CrossRef
- Barkan, R. and Busemeyer, J. R. (1999), Changing plans: Dynamic inconsistency and the effect of experience on the reference point, Psychological Bulletin and Review 6, 547-555.
- Beach, L. R. and Mitchell, T. R. (1978), A contingency model for the selection of decision strategies, Academy of Management Review 3, 439-449. CrossRef
- Becker, G. M. and McClintock, C. M. (1967), Value: Behavioral decision theory. Annual Review of Psychology 18, 239-286. CrossRef
- Bertsekas, D. P. (1976), Dynamic Programming and Stochastic Control. New York: Academic Press.
- Busemeyer, J. R. and Townsend, J. T. (1993), Decision field theory: A dynamiccognitive approach to decision making in an uncertain environment, Psychological Review 100, 432-459. CrossRef
- Busemeyer, J. R., Weg, E., Barkan, R., Li, X. and Ma, Z. (2000), Dynamic and consequential consistency of choices between paths of decision trees, Journal of Experimental Psychology, General 129, 530-545. CrossRef
- Camerer, C. F. and Ho, T. H. (1994), Violations of the betweenness axiom and nonlinearity in probability. Journal of Risk and Uncertainty 8(2), 167-196. CrossRef
- Cubitt, R. P., Starmer, C. and Sugden, R. (1998),Dynamic choice and the common ratio effect: An experimental investigation, The Economic Journal 108, 1362-1380. CrossRef
- DeGroot, M. H. (1970), Optimal Statistical Decisions. New York: McGraw-Hill.
- Fishburn, P. C. (1970), Utility Theory for Decision Making. New York: JohnWiley and Sons.
- Ford, J. K., Schmitt, N., Schechtman, S. L., Hults, B. M. and Doherty, M. L. (1989), Process tracing methods: Contributions, problems, and neglected research questions, Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes 43, 75-117. CrossRef
- Gass, S. (1985), Decision Making, Models and Algorithms: A First Course. New York: John Wiley and Sons.
- Gneezy, U. (1996), Probability judgments in multi-stage problems: Experimental evidence of systematic biases, Acta Psychologic 93, 59-68. CrossRef
- Hammond, P. J. (1988), Consequentialist foundations for expected utility, Theory and Decision 25, 25-78. CrossRef
- Kahneman, D. and Tversky, A. (1979), Prospect theory: An analysis of decision under risk, Econometrica 47, 263-291. CrossRef
- Kertsholt, J. H. (1996), The effect of information costs on strategy selection in dynamic decision tasks, Acta Psychologica 94, 273-290. CrossRef
- Lewin, K. (1935), A Dynamic Theory of Personality. New York: McGraw-Hill.
- Loomes, G., Starmer, C. and Sugden, R. (1991), Observing violations of transitivity by experimental methods, Econometrica 59(2): 425-439. CrossRef
- Luce, R. D. (2000), Utility of Gains and Losses. New York: Erlbaum.
- Luce, R. D., Krantz, D. H., Suppes, P. and Tversky, A. (1990). Foundations of Measurement, Vol. 3: Representation, Axiomatization, and Invariance. San Diego: Academic Press.
- Machina, M. J. (1989), Dynamic consistency and non-expected utility models of choice under uncertainty, Journal of Economic Literature 27, 1622-1668.
- Miller, N. E. (1944), Experimental studies of conflict. In: J. McV. Hunt (ed.), Personality and the Behavior Disorders, Vol. 1 (pp. 431-465). New York: The Ronald Press.
- Payne, J.W., Bettman, J. R. and Johnson, E. J. (1993), The Adaptive Decision Maker. New York: Cambridge University Press.
- Raiffa, H. (1968), Decision Analysis. London: Addison-Wesley.
- Rapaport, A. (1975), Research paradigms for studying dynamic decision behavior. In: D. Wendt and C. Vlek (eds.), Utility, Probability, and Human Decision Making, Vol. 11. Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Reidel.
- Sarin, R. and Wakker, P. (1998), Dynamic choice and non-expected utility, Journal of Risk and Uncertainty 17, 87-119. CrossRef
- Savage, L. J. (1954), The Foundations of Statistics. New York: John Wiley and Sons.
- Taylor, S. E. (1991), Asymmetrical effects of positive and negative events: The mobilization-minimization hypothesis, Psychological Bulletin 110, 67-85. CrossRef
- Thaler, R. H. and Johnson, E. J. (1990), Gambling with the house money and trying to break even: The effects of prior outcomes on risky choice, Management Science 36, 643-660. CrossRef
- Townsend, J. T. and Busemeyer, J. R. (1989), Approach-avoidance: Return to dynamic decision behavior. In:C. Izawa (ed.), Current Issues in Cognitive Processes: Tulane Flowerree Symposium on Cognition. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
- Tversky, A. and Kahneman, D. (1987), Rational choice and the framing of decisions. In: R. M. Hogarth (ed.), Rational Choice: The Contrast between Economics and Psychology. (pp. 67-94). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
- von Neumann, J. and Morgenstern, O. (1947), Theory of Games and Economic Behavior. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
- Weber, E. U. (1994), From subjective probabilities to decision weights: The effect of asymmetric loss function on the evaluation of uncertain outcomes and events, Psychological Bulletin 115, 228-242. CrossRef
- Weber, M. and Camerer, C. (1987), Recent developments in modeling preferences under risk, OR Spectrum 9, 129-151.
- Zimmer, A. C. (1983), Verbal vs. numerical processing of subjective probabilities. In R. W. Scholz (ed.), Decision Making under Uncertainty. Amsterdam: Elsevier.
- Multiple-Stage Decision-Making: The Effect of Planning Horizon Length on Dynamic Consistency
Theory and Decision
Volume 51, Issue 2-4 , pp 217-246
- Cover Date
- Print ISSN
- Online ISSN
- Kluwer Academic Publishers
- Additional Links
- Approach-avoidance conflict
- Dynamic consistency
- Multi-stage decision-making
- Industry Sectors