Please wait a minute...
Advances in Psychological Science    2013, Vol. 21 Issue (8) : 1331-1346     DOI: 10.3724/SP.J.1042.2013.01331
Editor-In-Chief Invited |
Tri-Reference Point Theory of Decision Making: From Principles to Applications
X. T. WANG;WANG Peng
(1 University of South Dakota, SD 57069, USA) (2 School of Psychology and Cognitive Science, East China Normal University, Shanghai, 200062, China)
Download: PDF(360 KB)  
Export: BibTeX | EndNote | Reference Manager | ProCite | RefWorks    
Abstract  Tri-reference point (TRP) theory (Wang, 2008a; Wang & Johnson, 2012) makes use of three reference points, minimum requirement (MR), status quo (SQ), and goal (G) to demarcate choice outcome space into four functional regions: failure, loss, gain, and success. Based on the priority order of the reference points: MR > G > SQ, the model derives from the four regions a double S-shaped value function, connected at the point of SQ. Risk preferences switched between risk-seeking and risk-aversion when the distribution of a gamble straddles a different reference point and resulted in gain-loss and success-failure asymmetries. In sum, the basic task in making risky choices is to maximize the likelihood of reaching a goal and minimize the likelihood of falling below the MR at the same time. The TRP theory synthetically combines the powerful concept of mean-variance used in statistics and finance with the concept of reference points in the behavioral decision making literature takes into consideration the mean-variance distribution of a choice option and its relationship with the three reference points in order to reach adaptive decisions. In this paper, we introduce the basic assumptions, operational principles, experimental tests of the TRP theory, and compare the TRP theory against expected utility theory, and prospect theory. We also discuss practical guidance and implications of the TRP theory for managerial decision making.
Keywords decision making      risky choice      expected utility      reference point      value function      prospect theory     
Corresponding Authors: X. T. WANG   
Issue Date: 15 August 2013
Service
E-mail this article
E-mail Alert
RSS
Articles by authors
X. T. WANG
WANG Peng
Cite this article:   
X. T. WANG,WANG Peng. Tri-Reference Point Theory of Decision Making: From Principles to Applications[J]. Advances in Psychological Science, 2013, 21(8): 1331-1346.
URL:  
http://journal.psych.ac.cn/xlkxjz/EN/10.3724/SP.J.1042.2013.01331     OR     http://journal.psych.ac.cn/xlkxjz/EN/Y2013/V21/I8/1331
[1] SONG Yunqiang; XU Ruiheng; XING Cai. Risk-sensitivity theory: Need motivates risky decision-making[J]. Advances in Psychological Science, 2017, 25(3): 486-499.
[2] LI Aimei; SUN Hailong; Xiong Guanxing; WANG Xiaotian; LI Bin. The effect and cognitive mechanism of “time poverty” on intertemporal choice and proactive behavior[J]. Advances in Psychological Science, 2016, 24(6): 874-884.
[3] YANG Qun; LI Yu; SUN Delin; LEE Tatia M. C.. The effects of stress on risky and social decision making[J]. Advances in Psychological Science, 2016, 24(6): 974-984.
[4] XU Fuming; SHI Yanwei; LI Ou; ZHANG Hui; LI Yan. Mechanisms and measures of the public’ sense of income unfairness: Dual viewpoint of reference dependence and loss aversion[J]. Advances in Psychological Science, 2016, 24(5): 665-675.
[5] LI Aimei; TAN Lei; SUN Hailong; Xiong Guanxing; Pan Jiyang. The effect of sleep deprivation on risky choice: A dual-process models approach[J]. Advances in Psychological Science, 2016, 24(5): 804-814.
[6] WANG Huifang; JIANG Jingchuan. Framing effect in elderly adults[J]. Advances in Psychological Science, 2016, 24(4): 612-621.
[7] DENG Ying; XU Fu-Ming; LI Ou; SHI Yan-Wei; LIU Cheng-Hao. The framing effect on social preferences[J]. Advances in Psychological Science, 2016, 24(4): 622-632.
[8] HUANG Wenqiang; YANG Shasha; YU Ping. Neural mechanisms of risky decision-making based on rodent research[J]. Advances in Psychological Science, 2016, 24(11): 1767-1779.
[9] LI Xiao-Ming; HUANG Rong; Zhou Xin. The Effect of Accidental Emotions on Decision Making[J]. Advances in Psychological Science, 2015, 23(6): 919-925.
[10] ZHANG Liyuan; BI Yanling; ZHANG Baoshan; CHEN Lu. The Elderly Decision Making: The Current Situations and Challenges of the Field[J]. Advances in Psychological Science, 2015, 23(5): 858-870.
[11] HUANG Jun; LI Ye; ZHANG Hongwei. The Application and Development of Construal Level Theory[J]. Advances in Psychological Science, 2015, 23(1): 110-119.
[12] XIONG Guanxing; LI Aimei; WANG X. T.. An Analysis of Wage Gap and Turnover Decisions Based on Tri-Reference Point Theory[J]. Advances in Psychological Science, 2014, 22(9): 1363-1371.
[13] LIU Yang;SUN Yan. New Avenues for Framing Effect Research in Decision-making: From Risky to Intertemporal and from Verbal to Graph Framing[J]. Advances in Psychological Science, 2014, 22(8): 1205-1217.
[14] SHI Yanwei;XU Fuming;LI Yan;LIU Chenghao;LI Bin. The Framing Effect in the Public Decision-making : Theoretical Explanation and Influential Factors[J]. Advances in Psychological Science, 2014, 22(8): 1303-1311.
[15] ZHANG Ying;FENG Tingyong. The Developmental Cognitive Neural Mechanisms of Adolescents’ Risky Decision Making[J]. Advances in Psychological Science, 2014, 22(7): 1139-1148.
Viewed
Full text


Abstract

Cited

  Shared   
  Discussed   
Copyright © Advances in Psychological Science
Support by Beijing Magtech