测试个体偏好的传递性。

IF 1 Q3 PSYCHOLOGY, MULTIDISCIPLINARY Decision-Washington Pub Date : 2022-07-04 DOI:10.1037/dec0000185
M. Birnbaum
{"title":"测试个体偏好的传递性。","authors":"M. Birnbaum","doi":"10.1037/dec0000185","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This study presents a new experiment testing transitivity of preferences in individuals using the stimulus design of Butler and Pogrebna (2018). Each individual responded to each choice problem 60 times, replicated twice in each of 30 sessions. The individual true and error model was used to estimate the incidence of transitive and intransitive preference patterns and error rates for the choice problems for each person. Although the data of most participants were consistent with transitivity, a few participants showed convincing evidence of intransitive preferences patterns at least part of the time, and several participants showed clear evidence of changing true preferences over time. This study also tested and found violations of the assumption that choice responses are independently and identically distributed over repetitions, an assumption used previously in certain random utility models and statistical analyses. Violations of iid are compatible with Markov True and Error Models in which parameters drift gradually over time.","PeriodicalId":29935,"journal":{"name":"Decision-Washington","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-07-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Testing transitivity of preference in individuals.\",\"authors\":\"M. Birnbaum\",\"doi\":\"10.1037/dec0000185\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"This study presents a new experiment testing transitivity of preferences in individuals using the stimulus design of Butler and Pogrebna (2018). Each individual responded to each choice problem 60 times, replicated twice in each of 30 sessions. The individual true and error model was used to estimate the incidence of transitive and intransitive preference patterns and error rates for the choice problems for each person. Although the data of most participants were consistent with transitivity, a few participants showed convincing evidence of intransitive preferences patterns at least part of the time, and several participants showed clear evidence of changing true preferences over time. This study also tested and found violations of the assumption that choice responses are independently and identically distributed over repetitions, an assumption used previously in certain random utility models and statistical analyses. Violations of iid are compatible with Markov True and Error Models in which parameters drift gradually over time.\",\"PeriodicalId\":29935,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Decision-Washington\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-07-04\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Decision-Washington\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1037/dec0000185\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"PSYCHOLOGY, MULTIDISCIPLINARY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Decision-Washington","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1037/dec0000185","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, MULTIDISCIPLINARY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

本研究提出了一项新的实验,使用Butler和Pogrebna(2018)的刺激设计来测试个体偏好的传递性。每个人对每个选择问题回答60次,在30个环节中每个环节重复两次。个体真误模型用于估计每个人在选择问题中传递和不传递偏好模式的发生率和错误率。尽管大多数参与者的数据与及物性一致,但少数参与者至少在部分时间内表现出了不及物偏好模式的令人信服的证据,一些参与者表现出了真实偏好随时间变化的明确证据。这项研究还测试并发现了对选择反应在重复中独立且相同分布的假设的违反,这是以前在某些随机效用模型和统计分析中使用的假设。iid的违反与马尔可夫真误差模型兼容,其中参数随时间逐渐漂移。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Testing transitivity of preference in individuals.
This study presents a new experiment testing transitivity of preferences in individuals using the stimulus design of Butler and Pogrebna (2018). Each individual responded to each choice problem 60 times, replicated twice in each of 30 sessions. The individual true and error model was used to estimate the incidence of transitive and intransitive preference patterns and error rates for the choice problems for each person. Although the data of most participants were consistent with transitivity, a few participants showed convincing evidence of intransitive preferences patterns at least part of the time, and several participants showed clear evidence of changing true preferences over time. This study also tested and found violations of the assumption that choice responses are independently and identically distributed over repetitions, an assumption used previously in certain random utility models and statistical analyses. Violations of iid are compatible with Markov True and Error Models in which parameters drift gradually over time.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Decision-Washington
Decision-Washington PSYCHOLOGY, MULTIDISCIPLINARY-
CiteScore
2.10
自引率
6.70%
发文量
58
期刊最新文献
Correction to Lee and Holyoak (2023). Models of risky choice across ages, frames, and individuals: The fuzzy frontier. Subjective equivalence: A basic requirement for strict framing effects: Commentary on Huizenga et al. (2023). Differential framing effects: 11 more ways to study them. Discounting future reward in an uncertain world.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1