{"status":"ok","message-type":"work","message-version":"1.0.0","message":{"indexed":{"date-parts":[[2026,10,1]],"date-time":"2026-10-01T04:15:20Z","timestamp":1790828120913,"version":"4.1.0"},"reference-count":18,"publisher":"Springer Science and Business Media LLC","issue":"6","license":[{"start":{"date-parts":[[2020,7,27]],"date-time":"2020-07-27T00:00:00Z","timestamp":1595808000000},"content-version":"tdm","delay-in-days":0,"URL":"https:\/\/creativecommons.org\/licenses\/by\/4.0"},{"start":{"date-parts":[[2020,7,27]],"date-time":"2020-07-27T00:00:00Z","timestamp":1595808000000},"content-version":"vor","delay-in-days":0,"URL":"https:\/\/creativecommons.org\/licenses\/by\/4.0"}],"funder":[{"DOI":"10.13039\/501100000764","name":"King's College London","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","id":[{"id":"10.13039\/501100000764","id-type":"DOI","asserted-by":"crossref"}]}],"content-domain":{"domain":["link.springer.com"],"crossmark-restriction":false},"short-container-title":["Psychon Bull Rev"],"published-print":{"date-parts":[[2020,12]]},"abstract":"<jats:title>Abstract<\/jats:title><jats:p>It is often assumed that most people are loss averse, placing more weight on losses than commensurate gains; however, some research identifies variability in loss sensitivity that reflects features of the environment. We examined this plasticity in loss sensitivity by manipulating the size and distribution of possible outcomes in a set of mixed gambles, and assessing individual stability in loss sensitivity. In each of two sessions, participants made accept-reject decisions for 64 mixed-outcome gambles. Participants were randomly assigned to conditions defined by the relative range of losses and gains (wider range of losses vs. wider range of gains), and the currency-units at stake (\u2018pennies\u2019 vs. \u2018pounds\u2019). Participants showed modest but non-trivial consistency in their sensitivity to losses; though loss sensitivity also varied substantially with our manipulations. When possible gains had greater range than possible losses, most participants were loss averse; however, when possible losses had the greater range,<jats:italic>reverse<\/jats:italic>loss aversion was the norm (i.e., more weight on gains than losses). This is consistent with decision-by-sampling theory, whereby an outcome\u2019s rank within a consideration-set determines its value, but can also be explained by the gamble\u2019s expected-value rank within the decision-set, or by adapting aspirations to the decision-environment. Loss aversion was also reduced in the second session of decisions when the stakes had been higher in the previous session. This illustrates the influence of prior context on current sensitivity to losses, and suggests a role for idiosyncratic experiences in the development of individual differences in loss sensitivity.<\/jats:p>","DOI":"10.3758\/s13423-020-01775-y","type":"journal-article","created":{"date-parts":[[2020,7,27]],"date-time":"2020-07-27T22:03:24Z","timestamp":1595887404000},"page":"1333-1340","update-policy":"https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1007\/springer_crossmark_policy","source":"Crossref","is-referenced-by-count":16,"title":["Losing my loss aversion: The effects of current and past environment on the relative sensitivity to losses and gains"],"prefix":"10.3758","volume":"27","author":[{"given":"Tim","family":"Rakow","sequence":"first","affiliation":[],"role":[{"vocabulary":"crossref","role":"author"}]},{"given":"Nga Yiu","family":"Cheung","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[],"role":[{"vocabulary":"crossref","role":"author"}]},{"given":"Camilla","family":"Restelli","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[],"role":[{"vocabulary":"crossref","role":"author"}]}],"member":"297","published-online":{"date-parts":[[2020,7,27]]},"reference":[{"issue":"6","key":"1775_CR1","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"553","DOI":"10.1017\/S1930297500006689","volume":"12","author":"NJS Ashby","year":"2017","unstructured":"Ashby, N. J. S., Rakow, T., & Yechiam, E. (2017). \u2018Tis better to choose and lose than to never choose at all. Judgment and Decision Making, 12(6), 553-562. http:\/\/journal.sjdm.org\/17\/17622\/jdm17622.html","journal-title":"Judgment and Decision Making"},{"issue":"4","key":"1775_CR2","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"323","DOI":"10.1037\/1089-2680.5.4.323","volume":"5","author":"RF Baumeister","year":"2001","unstructured":"Baumeister, R. F., Bratslavsky, E., Finenauer, C., & Vohs, K. D. (2001). Bad is stronger than good. Review of General Psychology, 5(4), 323-370.","journal-title":"Review of General Psychology"},{"issue":"1","key":"1775_CR3","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"73","DOI":"10.2307\/2118511","volume":"110","author":"S Benartzi","year":"1995","unstructured":"Benartzi, S., & Thaler, R. H. (1995). Myopic loss aversion and the equity premium puzzle. Quarterly Journal of Economics, 110(1), 73-92.","journal-title":"Quarterly Journal of Economics"},{"key":"1775_CR4","doi-asserted-by":"crossref","first-page":"214","DOI":"10.1017\/S1930297500005945","volume":"8","author":"E Ert","year":"2013","unstructured":"Ert, E., & Erev, I. (2013). On the descriptive value of loss aversion in decisions under risk: Six clarifications. Judgment and Decision Making, 8, 214\u2013235.","journal-title":"Judgment and Decision Making"},{"issue":"3","key":"1775_CR5","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"497","DOI":"10.1002\/jcpy.1047","volume":"28","author":"D Gal","year":"2018","unstructured":"Gal, D., & Rucker, D. D. (2018). The loss of loss aversion: Will it loom larger than its gain. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 28(3), 497-516.","journal-title":"Journal of Consumer Psychology"},{"key":"1775_CR6","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"21","DOI":"10.1016\/j.cognition.2011.12.002","volume":"123","author":"A Gl\u00f6ckner","year":"2012","unstructured":"Gl\u00f6ckner, A., & Pachur, T. (2012). Cognitive models of risky choice: Parameter stability and predictive accuracy of prospect theory. Cognition, 123, 21-32.","journal-title":"Cognition"},{"key":"1775_CR7","volume-title":"Thinking fast and slow","author":"D Kahneman","year":"2011","unstructured":"Kahneman, D. (2011). Thinking fast and slow. London: Allen Lane."},{"key":"1775_CR8","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"263","DOI":"10.2307\/1914185","volume":"47","author":"D Kahneman","year":"1979","unstructured":"Kahneman, D., & Tversky, A. (1979). Prospect theory: An analysis of decisions under risk. Econometrica, 47, 263-291.","journal-title":"Econometrica"},{"issue":"1","key":"1775_CR9","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"193","DOI":"10.1257\/jep.5.1.193","volume":"5","author":"D Kahneman","year":"1991","unstructured":"Kahneman, D., Knetsch, J. L., & Thaler, R. H. (1991). Anomalies: The endowment effect, loss aversion, and status-quo bias. Journal of Economic Perspectives, 5(1), 193\u2013206.","journal-title":"Journal of Economic Perspectives"},{"key":"1775_CR10","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"186","DOI":"10.1016\/j.cognition.2018.02.019","volume":"175","author":"C Leuker","year":"2018","unstructured":"Leuker, C., Pachur, T., Hertwig, R., & Pleskac, T.J. (2018). Exploiting risk-reward structures in decision making under risk. Cognition, 175, 186-200.","journal-title":"Cognition"},{"key":"1775_CR11","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"22151","DOI":"10.1073\/pnas.0908980106","volume":"106","author":"CY Olivola","year":"2009","unstructured":"Olivola, C. Y., & Sagara, N. (2009). Distributions of observed death tolls govern sensitivity to human fatalities. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the USA, 106, 22151-22156.","journal-title":"Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the USA"},{"issue":"4","key":"1775_CR12","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"296","DOI":"10.1207\/S15327957PSPR0504_2","volume":"5","author":"P Rozin","year":"2001","unstructured":"Rozin, P., & Royzman, E. B. (2001). Negativity bias, negativity dominance, and contagion. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 5(4), 296-320.","journal-title":"Personality and Social Psychology Review"},{"key":"1775_CR13","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"1","DOI":"10.1016\/j.cogpsych.2005.10.003","volume":"53","author":"N Stewart","year":"2006","unstructured":"Stewart, N., Chater, N., & Brown, G. D. (2006). Decision by sampling. Cognitive Psychology, 53, 1-26.","journal-title":"Cognitive Psychology"},{"key":"1775_CR14","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"515","DOI":"10.1126\/science.1134239","volume":"315","author":"SM Tom","year":"2007","unstructured":"Tom, S. M., Fox, C. R., Trepel, C., & Poldrack, R. A. (2007). The neural basis of loss aversion in decision-making under risk. Science, 315, 515-518.","journal-title":"Science"},{"issue":"1","key":"1775_CR15","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"7","DOI":"10.1037\/xge0000039","volume":"144","author":"L Walasek","year":"2015","unstructured":"Walasek, L., & Stewart, N. (2015). How to make loss aversion disappear and reverse: Tests of the Decision by Sampling origin of loss aversion. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 144(1), 7-11.","journal-title":"Journal of Experimental Psychology: General"},{"issue":"6","key":"1775_CR16","first-page":"957","volume":"45","author":"L Walasek","year":"2019","unstructured":"Walasek, L., & Stewart, N. (2019). Context dependent sensitivity to losses: Range and skew manipulations. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 45(6), 957-968.","journal-title":"Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition"},{"issue":"2","key":"1775_CR17","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"497","DOI":"10.1037\/a0029383","volume":"139","author":"E Yechiam","year":"2013","unstructured":"Yechiam, E., & Hochman, G. (2013). Losses as moderators of attention: Review and analysis of the unique effects of losses over gains. Psychological Bulletin, 139(2), 497-518. DOI: https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1037\/a0029383","journal-title":"Psychological Bulletin"},{"key":"1775_CR18","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","first-page":"55","DOI":"10.1027\/1618-3169\/a000126","volume":"59","author":"E Yechiam","year":"2012","unstructured":"Yechiam, E., & Rakow, T. (2012). The effect of foregone outcomes on choices from experience: An individual level modeling analysis. Experimental Psychology, 59, 55-67. DOI: https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1027\/1618-3169\/a000126","journal-title":"Experimental Psychology"}],"container-title":["Psychonomic Bulletin &amp; Review"],"original-title":[],"language":"en","link":[{"URL":"https:\/\/link.springer.com\/content\/pdf\/10.3758\/s13423-020-01775-y.pdf","content-type":"application\/pdf","content-version":"vor","intended-application":"text-mining"},{"URL":"https:\/\/link.springer.com\/article\/10.3758\/s13423-020-01775-y\/fulltext.html","content-type":"text\/html","content-version":"vor","intended-application":"text-mining"},{"URL":"https:\/\/link.springer.com\/content\/pdf\/10.3758\/s13423-020-01775-y.pdf","content-type":"application\/pdf","content-version":"vor","intended-application":"similarity-checking"}],"deposited":{"date-parts":[[2023,10,4]],"date-time":"2023-10-04T22:50:18Z","timestamp":1696459818000},"score":1,"resource":{"primary":{"URL":"https:\/\/link.springer.com\/10.3758\/s13423-020-01775-y"}},"subtitle":[],"short-title":[],"issued":{"date-parts":[[2020,7,27]]},"references-count":18,"journal-issue":{"issue":"6","published-print":{"date-parts":[[2020,12]]}},"alternative-id":["1775"],"URL":"https:\/\/doi.org\/10.3758\/s13423-020-01775-y","relation":{},"ISSN":["1069-9384","1531-5320"],"issn-type":[{"value":"1069-9384","type":"print"},{"value":"1531-5320","type":"electronic"}],"subject":[],"published":{"date-parts":[[2020,7,27]]},"assertion":[{"value":"27 July 2020","order":1,"name":"first_online","label":"First Online","group":{"name":"ArticleHistory","label":"Article History"}}]}}