Prospective reference theory: Experimental evidence and the connection to anchoring

When faced with a risky prospect, people often make decisions which are inconsistent with an objective assessment of probability. Viscusi’s Prospective Reference Theory (PRT, 1989) model offers a simple and intuitive framework to model such behavior. We conduct an experiment to test the validity of PRT, focusing on the unique pattern of dominance violations predicted by the model. Subjects’ dominated choices are more consistent with PRT than with other models, providing novel empirical support for PRT. In addition we also test the possible source of the probability distortions. Subjects’ tendency to anchor correlates positively with likelihood insensitivity, implying that for some subjects, their decisions under risk may be caused by heuristic processing. To further illustrate PRT’s potential, we discuss how it applies to several new choice anomalies and extend the model to capture other commonly-observed behaviors, such as choices implying an inverse S-shaped probability weighting function.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Journal of Risk and Uncertainty
Published
2026-03-14
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11166-026-09482-0
Primary Topic
Decision-Making and Behavioral Economics
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Prospective reference theory: Experimental evidence and the connection to anchoring

Christian König-Kersting, Marc A. Ragin, Johannes Gerd Jaspersen
Journal of Risk and Uncertainty
Decision-Making and Behavioral Economics
article

Prospective reference theory: Experimental evidence and the connection to anchoring

Christian König-Kersting, Marc A. Ragin, Johannes Gerd Jaspersen
article en

Abstract

When faced with a risky prospect, people often make decisions which are inconsistent with an objective assessment of probability. Viscusi’s Prospective Reference Theory (PRT, 1989) model offers a simple and intuitive framework to model such behavior. We conduct an experiment to test the validity of PRT, focusing on the unique pattern of dominance violations predicted by the model. Subjects’ dominated choices are more consistent with PRT than with other models, providing novel empirical support for PRT. In addition we also test the possible source of the probability distortions. Subjects’ tendency to anchor correlates positively with likelihood insensitivity, implying that for some subjects, their decisions under risk may be caused by heuristic processing. To further illustrate PRT’s potential, we discuss how it applies to several new choice anomalies and extend the model to capture other commonly-observed behaviors, such as choices implying an inverse S-shaped probability weighting function.

Journal of Risk and Uncertainty
University of Georgia (US), Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität München (DE), Jönköping University (SE)
Peace, Justice and strong institutions
Openalex Percentile: Top 22%
Decision-Making and Behavioral Economics
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.