Contrast effects or loss aversion? Comment on Usher and McClelland (2004).

by: JR Busemeyer, JT Townsend, A Diederich, R Barkan

Psychological Review, Vol. 112, No. 1. (January 2005), pp. 253-255.

View FullText article

DOI, Pubmed, Hubmed

Reviews [Write a review of this article]

There are no reviews of this article

Find related articles from these CiteULike users

psimen

Find related articles with these CiteULike tags

loss_aversion, multiple_choice

Abstract

M. Usher and J. L. McClelland (2004) recently proposed a new connectionist type of model to explain context effects on preferential choice including the similarity, attraction, and compromise effects. They compared their model with an earlier connectionist type model for these same effects proposed by R. Roe, J. R. Busemeyer, and J. T. Townsend (2001) and raised several new issues. The authors address these issues and point out the main theoretical differences between the 2 explanations for context effects.

@article{BusemeyerReplyUsherMcClelland, abstract = {M. Usher and J. L. McClelland (2004) recently proposed a new connectionist type of model to explain context effects on preferential choice including the similarity, attraction, and compromise effects. They compared their model with an earlier connectionist type model for these same effects proposed by R. Roe, J. R. Busemeyer, and J. T. Townsend (2001) and raised several new issues. The authors address these issues and point out the main theoretical differences between the 2 explanations for context effects.}, address = {Psychology Department, Indiana University, Bloomington, IN 47405, USA. jbusemey@indiana.edu}, author = {Busemeyer, J. R. and Townsend, J. T. and Diederich, A. and Barkan, R. }, citeulike-article-id = {877615}, doi = {10.1037/0033-295X.112.1.253}, issn = {0033-295X}, journal = {Psychological Review}, keywords = {loss\_aversion, multiple\_choice}, month = {January}, number = {1}, pages = {253--255}, posted-at = {2006-09-29 15:43:56}, priority = {0}, title = {Contrast effects or loss aversion? Comment on Usher and McClelland (2004).}, url = {http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0033-295X.112.1.253}, volume = {112}, year = {2005} }

RIS record

TY - JOUR ID - BusemeyerReplyUsherMcClelland L3 - citeulike-article-id:877615 TI - Contrast effects or loss aversion? Comment on Usher and McClelland (2004). JF - Psychological Review VL - 112 IS - 1 SP - 253 EP - 255 AD - Psychology Department, Indiana University, Bloomington, IN 47405, USA. jbusemey@indiana.edu SN - 0033-295X N2 - M. Usher and J. L. McClelland (2004) recently proposed a new connectionist type of model to explain context effects on preferential choice including the similarity, attraction, and compromise effects. They compared their model with an earlier connectionist type model for these same effects proposed by R. Roe, J. R. Busemeyer, and J. T. Townsend (2001) and raised several new issues. The authors address these issues and point out the main theoretical differences between the 2 explanations for context effects. KW - loss_aversion KW - multiple_choice AU - Busemeyer, JR AU - Townsend, JT AU - Diederich, A AU - Barkan, R PY - 2005/01// UR - http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0033-295X.112.1.253 ER -

RIS BibTeX