A Systematic Literature Review: Choice Bracketing in Decision making

Author:

Qandeel Mahmoud Salameh1

Affiliation:

1. University of Pécs

Abstract

Abstract Objectives In this research, the author revised the most controversial cited articles, which have 100 citations or more, between 1994 and 2022 to investigate the main reasons behind narrow bracketing and understand if it is rational psychological behavior or biased. Knowing the result would give scholars room to tackle this issue and look for more enhancements. Methods All open-access and non-restricted articles through the University of Pécs website were included, as were downloadable handbooks as well, but books were excluded. Due to time limitations and grasping pure results, the articles with 100 citations and above between 1994 and 2022 were selected. Results The author discovered that scholars discussed "choice bracketing" from their niche corner of science and letting other factors influence their research after thoroughly researching the literature. Accepting or rejecting the lottery, as well as decision differences between two separate choices, or a binary of choices, are not solely determined by determining factors such as bracketing or motivation, and they are not necessarily biased. Conclusions The author has elaborated and drawn maps for most factors that intervene in decision-making. However, by collecting the most debatable opinions from the literature, it was found that people’s decisions are driven by maximizing utility and loss aversion regarding wealth and income, individual psychology (emotions, heuristics, mental accounting), limitations of rationality and uncertainty, preferences and motivation, diversification limits, and time allocation. However, this is a psychological mode of thought that is limited to stimuli, timing, and rule factors. JEL Code: A14, D1, D71, D81, D83.

Publisher

Research Square Platform LLC

Reference38 articles.

1. Fungibility, Labels, and Consumption;Abeler J;J Eur Econ Assoc,2015

2. The brain as a Hierarchical organization;Brocas I;Am Econ Rev,2008

3. Are Risk Aversion and Impatience Related to Cognitive Ability?;Dohmen T,2010

4. Eggert H, Martinsson P, Eggert K. H.: Are Commercial Fishers Risk-Lovers? (2004).

5. Excessive Ambitions Excessive Ambitions;Elster J;Capitalism and Society,2009

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3