Remember Me
Or use your Academic/Social account:


Or use your Academic/Social account:


You have just completed your registration at OpenAire.

Before you can login to the site, you will need to activate your account. An e-mail will be sent to you with the proper instructions.


Please note that this site is currently undergoing Beta testing.
Any new content you create is not guaranteed to be present to the final version of the site upon release.

Thank you for your patience,
OpenAire Dev Team.

Close This Message


Verify Password:
Verify E-mail:
*All Fields Are Required.
Please Verify You Are Human:
fbtwitterlinkedinvimeoflicker grey 14rssslideshare1
Sibilla Di Guida; Ido Erev; Davide Marchiori (2014)
Types: Research
Subjects: decisions from experience, recency effect, cross cultural decision making; rare events; decisions from experience; clicking paradigm; recency effect, cross cultural decision making, Economie, rare events, clicking paradigm
This paper examines the effects of different cultural backgrounds on decisions from experience. In Experiment 1, participants from Denmark, Israel, and Taiwan faced each of six binary choice problems for 200 trials. The participants did not receive prior description of the payoff distributions, but obtained complete feedback after each choice. Comparison of choice behavior across cultural groups reveals similar overall choice rates, and similar indications of underweighting of rare events and of the payoff variability effect. In addition, subjects from Taiwan exhibited a stronger tendency to chase recent outcomes. That is, subjects from East Asia behaved “as if” they expected less change in the environment than subjects from West Asia and West Europe. Experiment 2 shows that an increase in the complexity of the choice tasks (i.e. adding slight variability to the safe option, and increasing the number of replicas for each option) does not break the similarity of choice rates across cultural groups, but reverses the observed chasing pattern: In Experiment 2, Israeli participants tended to chase recent outcomes more than did the Taiwanese. These results can be summarized with the assumption that the tendency to rely of small samples of past experiences (a sufficient condition for underweighting of rare events and the payoff variability effect) is robust to cultural differences, but the exact sampling process is culture- and framing-specific. An increase in the number of possible outcomes increases the probability of sampling the most recent trial in the West, but not in the East. Thus, behavior in the East appears less sensitive to task complexity.
  • The results below are discovered through our pilot algorithms. Let us know how we are doing!

    • Barron, G., & Erev, I. (2003). Small feedback-based decisions and their limited correspondence to description-based decisions. Journal of Behavioral Decision Making, 16, 215-233.
    • Busemeyer, J. R., & Townsend, J. T. (1993). Decision field theory: A dynamic-cognitive approach to decision making in an uncertain environment. Psychological Review, 100, 432-459.
    • Di Guida, S., Marchiori, D., & Erev, I. (2012). Decisions among defaults and the effect of the option to do nothing. Economics Letters, 117, 790-793.
    • Chomsky, N. (1995). The minimalist program. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
    • Erev, I., Ert, E., Roth, A. E., Haruvy, H., Herzog, S. M., Hau, R. , Hertwig, R., Stewart, T., West, R., & Lebiere, C. (2010). A choice Prediction Competition: Choices from Experience and from Description. Journal of Behavioral Decision Making, 23, 15-47.
    • Erev, I., Haruvy, E. (2013). Learning and the economics of small decisions. Invited chapter submitted to Kagel, J.H. and Roth, A.E. (Eds.), The Handbook of Experimental Economics. Princeton University Press. http://www.utdallas.edu/~eeh017200/papers/LearningChapter.pdf Ert, E., & Erev, I. (2007). Replicated alternatives and the role of confusion, chasing, and regret in decisions from experience. Journal of Behavioral Decision Making, 20, 305- 322.
    • Estes, W. K. (1962). Learning Theory. Annual Review of Psychology, 13, 107-144.
    • Gonzalez, C., Lerch, F. J., & Lebiere, C. (2003). Instance-based learning in dynamic decision making. Cognitive Science, 27, 591-635.
    • Grosskopf, B., Erev, I., & Yechiam, E. (2006). Foregone with the wind: Indirect payoff information and its implications for choice. International Journal of Game Theory, 34, 285-302.
    • Guo, T., Ji, L.-J., Spina, R., & Zhang, Z. (2012). Culture, temporal focus, and values of the past and the future. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 38, 1030-1040.
    • Hamamura, T., Heine, S. J., & Paulhus, D. L. (2008). Cultural Differences in Response Style: The Role of Dialectical Thinking. Personality and Individual Differences, 44, 932- 942.
    • Henrich, J., Heine, S. J., & Norenzayan, A. (2010). The weirdest people in the world? Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 33, 61-83.
    • Hertwig, R., Barron, G., Weber, E. U., & Erev, I. (2004). Decisions from experience and the effect of rare events in risky choice. Psychological Science, 15, 534-539.
    • Hertwig, R., & Erev, I. (2009). The description-experience gap in risky choice. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 13, 517-523.
    • Hofstede, G., Hofstede, G. J., & Minkov M. (2010). Cultures and Organizations: Software of the Mind (3rd ed.). New York, USA: McGraw-Hill.
    • Ji, L.-J., Guo, T., Zhang, Z., & Messervey, D. (2009). Looking into the past: Cultural differences in perception and representation of past information. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 96, 761-769.
    • Ji, L.-J., Nisbett, R E., & Su, Y. (2001). Culture, Change, and Prediction. Psychological Science, 12, 450-456.
    • Ji, L.-J., Zhang, Z., & Guo, T. (2008). To buy or to sell: Cultural differences in stock market decisions based on price trends. Journal of Behavioral Decision Making, 21, 399- 413.
    • Johnson-Laird, P. N., & Lee, N. Y. L. (2006). Are there cross-cultural differences in reasoning? Proceedings of the 28th Annual Conference of the Cognitive Science Society, 459-464.
    • Myers, J. L., & Sadler, E. (1960). Effects of range of payoffs as a variable in risk taking. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 60, 306-309.
    • Rakow, T., & Newell, B. R. (2010). Degrees of uncertainty: An overview and framework for future research on experience‐based choice. Journal of Behavioral Decision Making, 23, 1-14.
    • Peng, K., & Nisbett, R. E. (1999). Culture, Dialectics, and Reasoning about Contradiction. American Psychologist, 54, 741-754.
    • Shafir, S., Reich, T., Tsur, E., Erev, I., & Lotem, A. (2008). Perceptual accuracy and conflicting effects of certainty on risk-taking behaviour. Nature, 453, 917-920.
    • Skinner, B. F. (1953). Science and Human Behavior. New York: MacMillan.
    • Spencer-Rodgers, J., Williams, M. J., & Peng, K. (2010). Cultural Differences in Expectations of Change and Tolerance for Contradiction: A Decade of Empirical Research. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 14, 296-312.
    • Wallsten, T. S., & Gu, H. (2003). Distinguishing choice and subjective probability estimation processes: Implications for theories of judgment and for cross-cultural comparisons. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 90, 111-123.
    • Yates, J. F., Lee, J.-W., & Bush, J. G. (1997). General knowledge overconfidence: Crossnational variations, response style, and “reality”. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 70, 87-94.
    • Yates, J. F., Lee, J.-W., Shinotsuka, H., Patalano, A. L., & Sieck, W. R. (1998).CrossCultural Variations in Probability Judgment Accuracy: Beyond General Knowledge Overconfidence? Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 74, 89- 117.
    • Yates, J. F., Zhu, Y., Ronis, D. L., Wang, D. F., Shinotsuka, H., & Toda, M. (1989). Probability judgment accuracy: China, Japan, and the United States. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 43, 145-171.
  • No related research data.
  • No similar publications.

Share - Bookmark

Cite this article