Proportion Dominance: The Generality and Variability of Favoring Relative Savings Over Absolute Savings

20 Pages Posted: 4 Oct 2011

See all articles by Daniel M. Bartels

Daniel M. Bartels

University of Chicago - Booth School of Business

Date Written: 2006

Abstract

Four studies probe Ps' sensitivity to absolute and relative savings. In three studies, Ps read scenarios forcing a tradeoff of saving more lives (230 vs. 225) vs. saving a larger proportion of a population (225 ‚ 230 = 75% vs. 230 ‚ 920 = 25%). Ps' preferences were driven by both absolute and relative savings. Maximizing relative savings, called ‘‘proportion dominance’’ (PD), at the expense of absolute savings is non-normative, and most participants concur with this argument upon reflection (Studies 2 and 3). PD is related to individual differences, such that people scored as ‘‘rational’’ thinkers exhibited less PD than people scored as ‘‘experiential’’ thinkers (Studies 1 and 3). Finally, a fourth study extends these results, finding proportion dominance in other domains using a different paradigm. These four studies demonstrate both the generality (across domains and paradigms) and the variability (inter- and intraindividual) of proportion dominance.

Keywords: Decision making, Choice, Preference, Value of life, Proportion dominance, Individual differences, Evaluability, Risk perception

Suggested Citation

Bartels, Daniel M., Proportion Dominance: The Generality and Variability of Favoring Relative Savings Over Absolute Savings (2006). Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Vol. 100, pp. 76-95, 2006, Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=1938519

Daniel M. Bartels (Contact Author)

University of Chicago - Booth School of Business ( email )

5807 S. Woodlawn Avenue
Chicago, IL 60637
United States

Do you have negative results from your research you’d like to share?

Paper statistics

Downloads
80
Abstract Views
1,095
Rank
551,205
PlumX Metrics