IJSSER

Title: Investigating The Leddo, Jayanti and Duan (2019) Revised Prospect Theory Value Function in Argentina
Authors: John Leddo and Gabriela Duffy
\|\| \|\|
John Leddo is the director of research at MyEdMaster, LLC. Gabriela Duffy is a researcher at MyEdMaster.
MLA 8 Leddo, John, and Gabriela Duffy. "Investigating The Leddo, Jayanti and Duan (2019) Revised Prospect Theory Value Function in Argentina." Int. j. of Social Science and Economic Research, vol. 9, no. 5, May 2024, pp. 1536-1549, doi.org/10.46609/IJSSER.2024.v09i05.014. Accessed May 2024. APA 6 Leddo, J., & Duffy, G. (2024, May). Investigating The Leddo, Jayanti and Duan (2019) Revised Prospect Theory Value Function in Argentina. Int. j. of Social Science and Economic Research, 9(5), 1536-1549. Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.46609/IJSSER.2024.v09i05.014 Chicago Leddo, John, and Gabriela Duffy. "Investigating The Leddo, Jayanti and Duan (2019) Revised Prospect Theory Value Function in Argentina." Int. j. of Social Science and Economic Research 9, no. 5 (May 2024), 1536-1549. Accessed May, 2024. https://doi.org/10.46609/IJSSER.2024.v09i05.014.
References [1]. Alghalith, M., Floros, C., &Dukharan, M. (2012). Testing dominant theories and assumptions in behavioral finance. Proquest.http://search.proquest.com/docview/1014252017/94778EE9FA05455CPQ/4?accountid=34939 [2]. Boucher, I. & Leddo, J. (2022). Investigating the Leddo, Jayanti and Duan (2019) revised Prospect Theory value function with Nicaraguan students. International Journal of Social Science and Economic Research, 7(4), 1141-1152. [3]. Gilovich, T., Griffin, D., & Kahneman, D. (Eds.) (2002). Heuristics and Biases: The Psychology of Intuitive Judgment. New York: Cambridge University Press. [4]. Gu, Y. & Leddo, J. (2022). Investigating the Leddo, Jayanti and Duan (2019) revised Prospect Theory value function with Chinese students. International Journal of Social Science and Economic Research, 7(6), 1618-1631. [5]. Haridon, O.L. &Vieider, F. M. (2019). All over the map: A worldwide comparison of risk preferences. Quantitative Economic, 10, 185-215. [6]. Heinrich, J., Heine, S.J. &Norenzayan, A. (2010). The weirdest people in the world. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 33, 2-3. [7]. Jones, B.D. (2001). Politics and the Architecture of Choice: Bounded Rationality and Governance. London and Chicago: The University of Chicago Press. [8]. Kahneman, D., & Tversky, A. (1979). Prospect Theory: An Analysis of Decision Under Risk. Econometrica, 47(2), 263-91. [9]. Kahneman, D., & Tversky, A. (Eds.) (2000). Choices, Values, and Frames. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. [10]. Leddo, J., Jayanti, A. & Duan, I. (2019). Prospect Theory Revisited: Incorporating Decision Maker’s Goals into the Value Function. International Journal of Social Science and Economic Research, 4(10), 6619-6640. [11]. Leddo, J & Shukla, A. (2020). Prospect Theory Revisited: Investigating the Applicability of a Revised Value Function on Decisions that Benefit the Self or Others. International Journal of Social Science and Economic Research, 5(9), 2672-2684. [12]. Leddo, J &Elkas, M. (2021). Prospect Theory Revisited: Viewing the results of framed decisions through a revised value function. International Journal of Social Science and Economic Research, 6(10), 3972-3983. [13]. McClure, J. (2004). The Domestic and International Dimensions of Risk: Prospect Theory and Argentina (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). Naval PostGraduate School, Monetary California. [14]. Nwogugu, M. (2005). Towards multi-factor models of decision making and risk: A critique of Prospect Theory and Related Approaches, part I. The Journal of Risk Finance, 6, 2. pp. 160-162. [15]. Perez-Floriano, Lorena R. & Gonzalez, Jorge. (2007). Risk, safety and culture in Brazil and Argentina: The case of TransInc Corporation. International Journal of Manpower. 28. 403-417. 10.1108/01437720710778394. [16]. Riabacke, A. (2006). Managerial Decision Making Under Risk and Uncertainty. IAENG International Journal of Computer Science, Retrieved from http://www.iaeng.org/IJCS/issues_v32/issue_4/IJCS_32_4_12.pdf [17]. Tun, K., Tun, S., Campbell, J. & Leddo, J. (2022). Investigating the Leddo, Jayanti and Duan (2019) Revised Prospect Theory Value Function with Japanese Students. International Journal of Social Science and Economic Research, 7(9), 3024-3036. [18]. Tversky, A. & Kahneman, D. (1981). The framing of decisions and the psychology of choice. Science, 211, 453-458. [19]. Weyland, K. (1996). Risk Taking in Latin American Economic Restructuring: Lessons from Prospect Theory. International Studies Quarterly, 40(2), 185-207. [20]. Weyland, K. (2006). Bounded Rationality and Policy Diffusion: Social Sector Reform in Latin America. Princeton and Oxford: Princeton University Press.
ABSTRACT: Prospect Theory (Kahneman and Tversky, 1979) is a highly influential theory that predicts decision making when people are confronted with choices involving gains or losses with different degrees of uncertainty. Prospect Theory argues that people are generally risk averse when it comes to seeking gains and risk seeking when it comes to avoiding losses. Leddo et al. (2019) noted that the original formulation of Prospect Theory did not take into account people’s goals. They argued that people would be willing to take risks to achieve goals but become more risk averse once those goals are achieved, and they would become risk averse when confronted with losses in order to avoid a highly negative outcome but become more risk seeking to negate the negative outcome once that outcome occurred. Leddo et al.’s research confirmed this hypothesis, leading to a revision of Prospect Theory’s value function. The present research investigates whether the same revised value function can predict decisions made by people in other cultures. Accordingly, the present paper investigates whether the Leddo et al. (2019) findings will hold up with people from Argentina, a high-income country with a mixed economic system. In the present study 82 Argentine residents from the ages 15-75 were given scenarios involving sports decisions involving gains or losses above or below defined aspiration and avoidance levels (four scenarios in total with an average of 17 participants per scenario). Results showed that participants demonstrated the same frequency of risk-seeking behaviors for decisions involving losses than those involving gains, inconsistent with the original Kahneman and Tversky (1979) framework and consistent with the revised Leddo et al. (2019) framework. Additionally, participants showed more risk seeking behaviors for decisions involving outcomes below the avoidance and aspiration levels than for decisions involving outcomes above the avoidance and aspiration levels, consistent with the revised Leddo et al. (2019) framework. This held up individually for both gains and losses.

IJSSER is Member of