scispace - formally typeset
Search or ask a question
Author

Ned Welch

Bio: Ned Welch is an academic researcher from Carnegie Mellon University. The author has contributed to research in topics: Affect heuristic & Construal level theory. The author has an hindex of 3, co-authored 3 publications receiving 4281 citations.

Papers
More filters
Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: This article proposed the risk-as-feelings hypothesis, which highlights the role of affect experienced at the moment of decision making, and showed that emotional reactions to risky situations often diverge from cognitive assessments of those risks.
Abstract: Virtually all current theories of choice under risk or uncertainty are cognitive and consequentialist. They assume that people assess the desirability and likelihood of possible outcomes of choice alternatives and integrate this information through some type of expectation-based calculus to arrive at a decision. The authors propose an alternative theoretical perspective, the risk-as-feelings hypothesis, that highlights the role of affect experienced at the moment of decision making. Drawing on research from clinical, physiological, and other subfields of psychology, they show that emotional reactions to risky situations often diverge from cognitive assessments of those risks. When such divergence occurs, emotional reactions often drive behavior. The risk-as-feelings hypothesis is shown to explain a wide range of phenomena that have resisted interpretation in cognitive-consequentialist terms.

4,647 citations

Book ChapterDOI
TL;DR: The authors describe procedures for studying construal processes, strategies for getting people to answer the questions that interest researchers, and options for interpreting responses when people construe questions differently than was intended.
Abstract: Interpreting people’s preferences requires understanding how they have construed their tasks, interpreting the proposed alternatives in the context where the evaluation is being made. With stylized experimental or survey choices, researchers’ challenge is typically identifying the features that people add in order to make their task real enough to answer (i.e., how they read between the lines). With rich “real world” choices, researchers’ challenge is typically identifying the features that people neglect, as they reduce their task to manageable complexity (i.e., which lines they choose to read). In either case, if people misunderstand or mistrust the stated transaction, they may evaluate a different offer than the one that was proposed. Such misconstruals are a nuisance for investigators, insofar as dealing with them delays the measurements that motivated the research. However, they can also provide an opportunity, by focusing attention on how people give meaning to choice situations. This article describes procedures for studying construal processes, strategies for getting people to answer the questions that interest researchers, and options for interpreting responses when people construe questions differently than was intended.

50 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: In this paper, the authors evaluate the relevance of social-context features in a contingent valuation-like task, eliciting expressed willingness-to-pay (WTP) judgments for a proposed cleanup of the Monongahela River.
Abstract: Evaluative judgments should be sensitive to features of proposed transactions that respondents consider to be relevant. One set of potentially relevant features describes the social context in which a proposed exchange of goods and payment would occur. Two studies asked respondents to evaluate the relevance of social-context features in a contingent valuation-like task, eliciting expressed willingness-to-pay (WTP) judgments for a proposed cleanup of the Monongahela River. Participants found social-context features to be as relevant as features of the good and payment. Moreover, learning about social context reduced their willingness to participate in such tasks, especially for those respondents who had already performed the present task. However, it did not affect the magnitude of their WTP judgments. Overall, respondents were somewhat favorable to contingent valuation. The studies demonstrate a general method for evaluating procedures eliciting citizen judgments of environmental changes, building on gene...

3 citations


Cited by
More filters
Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: The author gives 4 reasons for considering the hypothesis that moral reasoning does not cause moral judgment; rather, moral reasoning is usually a post hoc construction, generated after a judgment has been reached.
Abstract: Research on moral judgment has been dominated by rationalist models, in which moral judgment is thought to be caused by moral reasoning. The author gives 4 reasons for considering the hypothesis that moral reasoning does not cause moral judgment; rather, moral reasoning is usually a post hoc construction, generated after a judgment has been reached. The social intuitionist model is presented as an alternative to rationalist models. The model is a social model in that it deemphasizes the private reasoning done by individuals and emphasizes instead the importance of social and cultural influences. The model is an intuitionist model in that it states that moral judgment is generally the result of quick, automatic evaluations (intuitions). The model is more consistent than rationalist models with recent findings in social, cultural, evolutionary, and biological psychology, as well as in anthropology and primatology.

6,080 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: This paper reviewed the literature on gender differences in economic experiments and identified robust differences in risk preferences, social (other-regarding) preferences, and competitive preferences, speculating on the source of these differences and their implications.
Abstract: This paper reviews the literature on gender differences in economic experiments. In the three main sections, we identify robust differences in risk preferences, social (other-regarding) preferences, and competitive preferences. We also speculate on the source of these differences, as well as on their implications. Our hope is that this article will serve as a resource for those seeking to understand gender differences and to use as a starting point to illuminate the debate on gender-specific outcomes in the labor and goods markets.

4,864 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: Determinants and consequences of accessibility help explain the central results of prospect theory, framing effects, the heuristic process of attribute substitution, and the characteristic biases that result from the substitution of nonextensional for extensional attributes.
Abstract: Early studies of intuitive judgment and decision making conducted with the late Amos Tversky are reviewed in the context of two related concepts: an analysis of accessibility, the ease with which thoughts come to mind; a distinction between effortless intuition and deliberate reasoning. Intuitive thoughts, like percepts, are highly accessible. Determinants and consequences of accessibility help explain the central results of prospect theory, framing effects, the heuristic process of attribute substitution, and the characteristic biases that result from the substitution of nonextensional for extensional attributes. Variations in the accessibility of rules explain the occasional corrections of intuitive judgments. The study of biases is compatible with a view of intuitive thinking and decision making as generally skilled and successful.

4,802 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: Kahneman as mentioned in this paper made a statement based on worked out together with Shane Federik the quirkiness of human judgment, which was later used in his speech at the Nobel Prize in economics.
Abstract: Daniel Kahneman received the Nobel Prize in economics sciences in 2002, December 8, Stockholm, Sweden. This article is the edited version of his Nobel Prize lecture. The author comes back to the problems he has studied with the late Amos Tversky and to debates conducting for several decades already. The statement is based on worked out together with Shane Federik the quirkiness of human judgment. Language: ru

4,462 citations

Book
01 Jul 2002
TL;DR: In this article, a review is presented of the book "Heuristics and Biases: The Psychology of Intuitive Judgment, edited by Thomas Gilovich, Dale Griffin, and Daniel Kahneman".
Abstract: A review is presented of the book “Heuristics and Biases: The Psychology of Intuitive Judgment,” edited by Thomas Gilovich, Dale Griffin, and Daniel Kahneman.

3,642 citations