Gneezy, List and Wu [Q. J. Econ. 121 (2006) 1283-1309] document that lotteries are often valued less than the lotteries’ worst outcomes. We show how to undo this result.

We replicate three pricing tasks of Gneezy, List and Wu (2006) for which they document the so called uncertainty effect, namely that people value a binary lottery over non-monetary outcomes less than other people value the lottery's worse outcome. Unlike the authors who implement a verbal...

We replicate three pricing tasks of Gneezy, List and Wu (2006) for which they document the so-called uncertainty effect, namely, that people value a binary lottery over non-monetary outcomes less than other people value the lottery’s worse outcome. While the authors implemented a verbal...

Drawing on Gneezy and Rustichini (2000), we illustrate that subjects' cognitive abilities seem at least as important for their performance as do financial incentives they face. Theorists should thus pay more attention to the ability aspect of cognitive production

We study experimentally the nature of dominance violations in three minimalist dominance solvable guessing games. We examine how subjects' reported reasoning processes translate into their stated choices and beliefs about others' choices, and how both reasoning processes and choices relate to...

We study experimentally the nature of dominance violations in three minimalist dominance-solvable guessing games. Only about a third of our subjects report reasoning consistent with dominance; they all make dominant choices and almost all expect others to do so. Nearly two-third of our subjects...

We investigate experimentally the conjecture that loss avoidance solves the tension in stag-hunt games for which payoff dominance and risk dominance make conflicting predictions. Contrary to received textbook wisdom, money-losing outcomes do shift behavior, albeit not strongly, toward the...