title: Real and hypothetical endowment effects when exchanging lottery tickets: Is regret a better explanation than loss aversion?
abstract: The endowment effect is the finding that possession of an item adds to its value. We introduce a new procedure for testing this effect: participants are divided into two groups. Possession group participants inspect a numbered lottery ticket and know it is theirs, while inspection group participants only inspect a lottery ticket without being endowed with it. Subsequently participants choose between playing the lottery with this (possessed or inspected) ticket, or exchanging it for another one. Our procedure tests for the effect of endowment while controlling for the influence of transaction costs as well as for inspection effects and the influence of bargaining roles (buyer vs. seller), which often afflict experimentation with the endowment effect. In a real setting, tickets in possession were valued significantly higher than inspected tickets. Contrary to some findings in the literature participants also correctly predicted these valuation differences in a hypothetical situation, both for themselves as well as for others. Furthermore, our results suggest that regret rather than loss aversion may be the source of the endowment effect in an experimental setting using lottery tickets. Applying our procedure to a setting employing riskless objects in form of mugs revealed rather ambiguous results, thus emphasizing that the role of regret might be less prominent in non-lottery settings.
authors.affiliation: Faculty of Psychology, University of Vienna, Austria.
authors.forename: Christoph
authors.initials: C
authors.lastname: Kogler
authors.forename: Anton
authors.initials: A
authors.lastname: Kühberger
authors.forename: Rainer
authors.initials: R
authors.lastname: Gilhofer
keywords: Endowment effect; Ownership; Prediction; Regret; Simulation
references.citation: J Pers Soc Psychol. 2007 Jul;93(1):12-22
references.pmid: 17605585
references.citation: J Pers Soc Psychol. 2002 Mar;82(3):314-27
references.pmid: 11902619
references.citation: J Pers Soc Psychol. 2000 Jul;79(1):66-76
references.pmid: 10909878
references.citation: J Abnorm Psychol. 1956 May;52(3):384-9
references.pmid: 13318848
references.citation: Psychol Rev. 1995 Apr;102(2):379-95
references.pmid: 7740094
references.citation: J Consum Psychol. 2007 Jan;17(1):25-28
references.pmid: 18568095
references.citation: Organ Behav Hum Decis Process. 1999 Jun;78(3):204-231
references.pmid: 10343064
references.citation: Behav Brain Sci. 2001 Jun;24(3):383-403; discussion 403-51
references.pmid: 11682798