Explore the vast range of titles available.

Loss aversion can occur in riskless and risky choices. We present novel evidence on both in a non-student sample (660 randomly selected customers of a car manufacturer). We measure loss aversion in riskless choice in endowment effect experiments within and between subjects and find similar levels of average loss aversion in both. The subjects of the within study also participate in a simple lottery choice task which arguably measures loss aversion in risky choices. We find substantial heterogeneity in both measures of loss aversion. Loss aversion in riskless choice and loss aversion in risky choice are strongly positively correlated, but on average riskless loss aversion is higher than risky loss aversion. We find that in both choice tasks, loss aversion increases in age, income, and wealth, and decreases in education. Our results provide novel supportive input to the debate about the reality of loss aversion.

Family firms are thought to pursue nonfinancial goals that provide socioemotional wealth, but socioemotional wealth is feasible only with family control of the firm. Using prospect theory, we hypothesize that socioemotional wealth increases with the extent of current control, duration of control, and intentions for transgenerational control, thus adding to the price at which owners would be willing to sell their firms to nonfamily buyers. Findings from two countries show that current control has no impact, and duration of control has a mixed impact. However, intention for transgenerational control has a consistently positive impact on the perceived acceptable selling price.

This research proposes that the concept of emotional attachment, and specifically the independent constructs of psychological ownership and affective reaction, can help explain many of the endowment effect findings documented in the literature. We define these constructs and then test them across a set of nine studies in which we both replicate previous and generate new endowment effect findings, and then show that psychological ownership and affective reaction can mediate the effects. In doing so, we offer direct empirical support for the idea of emotional attachment as a driver of loss aversion while also providing practitioners and future endowment effect researchers with new insights about the psychological processes that underlie the endowment effect.

Recent models of reference-dependent preferences indicate that expectations may play a prominent role in the presence of behavioral anomalies. A subset of such expectations-based models predicts an “endowment effect for risk”: that risk attitudes differ when reference points change from certain to stochastic. In two purposefully simple risk preference experiments, eliminating often-discussed confounds, I demonstrate both between and within subjects such an endowment effect for risk. These results provide needed separation between expectations-based reference-dependent models, allow for evaluation of recent theoretical extensions, and may help to close a long-standing debate in decision science on inconsistency between utility elicitation methodologies.

While evidence suggests that people evaluate outcomes with respect to reference points, little is known about what determines them. We conduct two experiments that show that reference points are determined, at least in part, by expectations. In an exchange experiment, we endow subjects with an item and randomize the probability they will be allowed to trade. Subjects that are less likely to be able to trade are more likely to choose to keep their item. In a valuation experiment, we randomly assign subjects a high or low probability of obtaining an item and elicit their willingness-to-accept for it. The high probability treatment increases valuation of the item by 20-30%.

This study aims to determine a theoretical basis for the assignment of property rights by applying an evolutionary game model in which two types of workers apply for their effort for the increase of the property value. By extending the evolutionary game approach to determine the theoretical basis supporting that the property rights institution is preceded by the evolutionarily developed human psyche, due originally to Eswaran and Neary, the resulting evolutionary stable set of preferences differs from them since the relative endowment effect hardwired depends on the productivity difference between the two parties.

Many companies offer websites that enable customers to design their own individual products, which the manufacturer can then produce to order. To date, the economic value of products self-designed using mass customization (MC) toolkits has been attributed to the two factors of preference fit achieved (which should be as high as possible) and design effort (which should be as low as possible). On the basis of literature on behavioral decision making, we suggest a third factor, namely the awareness of being the creator of the product design. In the course of five different studies, we provide experimental evidence that this \"I designed it myself\" effect creates economic value for the customer. Regardless of the two other factors, self-designed products generate a significantly higher willingness to pay. This effect is mediated by feelings of accomplishment and moderated by the outcome of the process as well as the individual's perceived contribution to the self-design process. These findings have important implications for MC companies: It is not enough merely to design MC toolkits in such a way that preference fit is maximized and design effort is minimized. To capture the full value of MC, toolkits should also elicit \"I designed it myself\" feelings.

Migration has always involved stress and risk. More risk-averse households are less likely to move, while less risk-averse households will seek out opportunities and migrate. We investigate how the theoretical contributions of prospect theory, and specifically the endowment effect, can provide new understanding about decisions whether to migrate or not. We test the hypothesis that risk aversion extends the length of stay in the dwelling and, by extension, in the local labor and housing markets. How long people remain in place is a function, we hypothesize, of their independently self-assessed propensity to take risks, after controlling for a range of demographic and socioeconomic characteristics. We use the theoretical insights of prospect theory and the endowment effect (the notion of the “use value” differing from the “exchange value”) to explain the likelihood of staying after controlling for life-course events. The results confirm the explanatory power of self-assessed risk in the decision to migrate or stay and, equally important, confirm the role of the endowment effect.

The common finding that selling prices exceed buying prices (the so-called endowment effect) is typically explained by the assumptions that consumers evaluate potential transactions with respect to their current holdings and that the owners of a good regard its potential loss to be more significant than nonowners regard its potential acquisition. In contrast to this \"pain-of-losing\" account, the authors propose that the endowment effect reflects a reluctance to trade on terms that appear unfavorable with respect to salient reference prices. In six experiments (and eight more summarized in appendixes), the authors show that manipulations that reduce the gap between valuations and reference prices reduce or eliminate the endowment effect. These results suggest that the endowment effect is often best construed as an aversion to bad deals rather than an aversion to losing possessions.

Previous research has focused on studying the endowment effect for transactions that take place in the present. Many real-world transactions, however, are delayed into the future (i.e., people agree to buy or sell, but the actual transaction does not materialize until a later time). Here we investigate how transaction timing affects the endowment effect. In five studies, we show that the endowment effect systematically increases as transactions are delayed into the future. Specifically, buying prices significantly decrease as the transaction is delayed, while selling prices remain constant, resulting in an amplified endowment effect (Experiment 1). This pattern is not produced by a discounting of the money involved in the transaction (Experiment 2), and it holds across different types of items (Experiment 3). We also show that the phenomenon cannot be explained by sellers anticipating becoming increasingly attached to the items over time (Experiment 4). Finally, we demonstrate that this increased endowment effect in the future holds in the field, in the context of a real market and with real transactions (Experiment 5).