The present study examined the power of endings on risky decision making. With four experiments, the changes in the individuals’ risk-taking tendencies were examined as the end of an investment decision task approached; the role of motivational shift toward emotional satisfaction in the ending effect was also explored. As predicted, participants who knew they were working on the last round of an investment task were more risk seeking than those who did not know (i.e., ending effect, Experiment 1). Experiments 2 through 4 examined the motivational mechanism of the ending effect. The results supported the notion that the motivation to pursue an emotionally rewarding ending leads to the ending effect. The present research complements existing motivational accounts of risk taking and suggests a new research direction of integrating factors associated with time perception of an approaching ending into existing models of risky decision making.
AliM. M. (1977). Probability and utility estimates for racetrack bettors. Journal of Political Economy, 85, 803-815. doi:10.1086/260600
2.
AschP.MalkielB. G.QuandtR. E. (1982). Racetrack betting and informed behavior. Journal of Financial Economics, 10, 187-194. doi:10.1016/0304-405X(82)90012-5
3.
BenartziS.ThalerR. H. (1995). Myopic loss aversion and the equity premium puzzle. The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 110, 73-92. doi:10.2307/2118511
4.
CarstensenL. L. (2006). The influence of a sense of time on human development. Science, 312, 1913-1915. doi:10.1126/science.1127488
5.
CarstensenL. L.FredricksonB. L. (1998). Influence of HIV status and age on cognitive representations of others. Health Psychology Official Journal of the Division of Health Psychology American Psychological Association, 17, 494-503. doi:10.1037/0278-6133.17.6.494
6.
CarstensenL. L.GrossJ. J.FungH. H. (1997). The social context of emotional experience. Annual Review of Gerontology and Geriatrics, 17, 325-352.
7.
CarstensenL. L.IsaacowitzD. M.CharlesS. T. (1999). Taking time seriously: A theory of socioemotional selectivity. American Psychologist, 54, 165-181. doi:10.1037/0003-066X.54.3.165
8.
CohenJ. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences (2nd ed.). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlaum Associates.
9.
CohenJ. (1992). A power primer. Psychological Bulletin, 112, 155-159. doi:10.1037/0033-2909.112.1.155
10.
DavisW. E.HicksJ. A. (2013). Maintaining hope at the 11th hour: Authenticity buffers the effect of limited time perspective on hope. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 39, 1634-1646. doi:10.1177/0146167213500150
11.
EffronD. A.BryanC. J.MurnighanJ. K. (2015). Cheating at the end to avoid regret. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 109, 395-414. doi:10.1037/pspa0000026
12.
FaulF.ErdfelderE.BuchnerA.LangA.-G. (2009). Statistical power analyses using G*Power 3.1: Tests for correlation and regression analyses. Behavior Research Methods, 41, 1149-1160. doi:10.3758/BRM.41.4.1149
13.
FaulF.ErdfelderE.LangA.-G.BuchnerA. (2007). G*Power 3: A flexible statistical power analysis program for the social, behavioral, and biomedical sciences. Behavior Research Methods, 39, 175-191. doi:10.3758/BF03193146
FlorackA.KellerJ.PalcuJ. (2013). Regulatory focus in economic contexts. Journal of Economic Psychology, 38, 127-137. doi:10.1016/j.joep.2013.06.001
16.
FredricksonB. L.CarstensenL. L. (1990). Choosing social partners: How old age and anticipated endings make people more selective. Psychology and Aging, 5, 335-347. doi:10.1037/0882-7974.5.3.335
17.
FungH. H.CarstensenL. L. (2006). Goals change when life’s fragility is primed: Lessons learned from older adults, the September 11 attacks and Sars. Social Cognition, 24, 248-278. doi:10.1521/soco.2006.24.3.248
18.
FungH. H.CarstensenL. L.LutzA. M. (1999). Influence of time on social preferences: Implications for life-span development. Psychology and Aging, 14, 595-604. doi:10.1037/0882-7974.14.4.595
19.
HauR.PleskacT. J.HertwigR. (2010). Decisions from experience and statistical probabilities: Why they trigger different choices than a priori probabilities. Journal of Behavioral Decision Making, 23, 48-68. doi:10.1002/bdm.665
20.
HertwigR.ErevI. (2009). The description-experience gap in risky choice. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 13, 517-523. doi:10.1016/j.tics.2009.09.004
21.
IsaacowitzD. M.WadlingerH. A.GorenD.WilsonH. R. (2006a). Is there an age-related positivity effect in visual attention? A comparison of two methodologies. Emotion, 6, 511-516. doi:10.1037/1528-3542.6.3.511
22.
IsaacowitzD. M.WadlingerH. A.GorenD.WilsonH. R. (2006b). Selective preference in visual fixation away from negative images in old age? An eye-tracking study. Psychology and Aging, 21, 40. doi:10.1037/0882-7974.21.1.40
23.
JohnsonJ. E. V.BruceA. C. (1993). Gluck’s second law: An empirical investigation of horserace betting in early and late races. Psychological Reports, 72, 1251-1258. doi:10.2466/pr0.1993.72.3c.1251
24.
KahnemanD.TverskyA. (1979). Prospect theory: An analysis of decision under risk. Econometrica, 47, 263-291. doi:10.2307/1914185
25.
KahnemanD.TverskyA. (1984). Choices, values, and frames. American Psychologist, 39, 341-350. doi:10.1037/0003-066X.39.4.341
26.
KelleyN. J.EastwickP. W.Harmon-JonesE.SchmeichelB. J. (2015). Jealousy increased by induced relative left frontal cortical activity. Emotion, 15, 550-555. doi:10.1037/emo0000068
27.
KennedyQ.MatherM.CarstensenL. L. (2004). The role of motivation in the age-related positivity effect in autobiographical memory. Psychological Science, 15, 208-214. doi:10.1111/j.0956-7976.2004.01503011.x
28.
KlugerA. N.StephanE.GanzachY.HershkovitzM. (2004). The effect of regulatory focus on the shape of probability-weighting function: Evidence from a cross-modality matching method. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 95, 20-39. doi:10.1016/j.obhdp.2004.05.003
29.
KopelmanR. E.MinkinB. L. (1991). Toward a psychology of parimutuel behavior: Test of Gluck’s laws. Psychological Reports, 68, 701-702. doi:10.2466/pr0.1991.68.2.701
30.
KühbergerA. (1998). The influence of framing on risky decisions: A meta-analysis. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 75, 23-55. doi:10.1006/obhd.1998.2781
31.
KühbergerA.WienerC. (2012). Explaining risk attitude in framing tasks by regulatory focus: A verbal protocol analysis and a simulation using fuzzy logic. Decision Analysis, 9, 359-372. doi:10.1287/deca.1120.0254
32.
LarrickR. P. (1993). Motivational factors in decision theories: The role of self-protection. Psychological Bulletin, 113, 440-450. doi:10.1037/0033-2909.113.3.440
33.
LarrickR. P.HeathC.WuG. (2009). Goal-induced risk taking in negotiation and decision making. Social Cognition, 27, 342-364. doi:10.1521/soco.2009.27.3.342
34.
LeighB. C. (1999). Peril, chance, adventure: Concepts of risk, alcohol use and risky behavior in young adults. Addiction, 94, 371-383. doi:10.1046/j.1360-0443.1999.9433717.x
35.
LevinI. P.GaethG. J.SchreiberJ.LauriolaM. (2002). A new look at framing effects: Distribution of effect sizes, individual differences, and independence of types of effects. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 88, 411-429. doi:10.1006/obhd.2001.2983
36.
LevinI. P.SchneiderS. L.GaethG. J. (1998). All frames are not created equal: A typology and critical analysis of framing effects. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 76, 149-188. doi:10.1006/obhd.1998.2804
37.
LiY.EpleyN. (2009). When the best appears to be saved for last: Serial position effects on choice. Journal of Behavioral Decision Making, 22, 378-389. doi:10.1002/bdm.638
38.
LockenhoffC. E.CarstensenL. L. (2007). Aging, emotion, and health-related decision strategies: Motivational manipulations can reduce age differences. Psychology and Aging, 22, 134-146. doi:10.1037/0882-7974.22.1.134
MatherM.CanliT.EnglishT.WhitfieldS.WaisP.OchsnerK.. . . CarstensenL. L. (2004). Amygdala responses to emotionally valenced stimuli in older and younger adults. Psychological Science, 15, 259-263. doi:10.1111/j.0956-7976.2004.00662.x
41.
MatherM.CarstensenL. L. (2003). Aging and attentional biases for emotional faces. Psychological Science, 14, 409-415. doi:10.1111/1467-9280.01455
42.
MatherM.CarstensenL. L. (2005). Aging and motivated cognition: The positivity effect in attention and memory. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 9, 496-502. doi:10.1016/j.tics.2005.08.005
43.
McGlothlinW. H. (1956). Stability of choices among uncertain alternatives. The American Journal of Psychology, 69, 604-615. doi:10.2307/1419083
44.
McKenzieC. R. M.SherS.Müller-TredeJ.LinC.LierschM. J.RawstronA. G. (2016). Are longshots only for losers? A new look at the last race effect. Journal of Behavioral Decision Making, 29, 25-36. doi:10.1002/bdm.1873
45.
MetzgerM. A. (1985). Biases in betting: An application of laboratory findings. Psychological Reports, 56, 883-888. doi:10.2466/pr0.1985.56.3.883
46.
MishraS. (2014). Decision-making under risk: Integrating perspectives from biology, economics, and psychology. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 18, 280-307. doi:10.1177/1088868314530517
47.
MishraS.FiddickL. (2012). Beyond gains and losses: The effect of need on risky choice in framed decisions. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 102, 1136-1147. doi:10.1037/a0027855
48.
MishraS.HingL. S. S.LalumiereM. L. (2015). Inequality and risk-taking. Evolutionary Psychology, 13, 1-11. doi:10.1177/1474704915596295
49.
O’BrienE.EllsworthP. C. (2012). Saving the last for best. Psychological Science, 23, 163-165. doi:10.1177/0956797611427408
50.
PennebakerJ. W.DyerM. A.CaulkinsR. S.LitowitzD. L.AckremanP. L.AndersonD. B.. . . McGrawK. M. (1979). Don’t the girls’ get prettier at closing time: A country and Western application to psychology. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 5, 122-125. doi:10.1177/014616727900500127
51.
PirlottA. G.MacKinnonD. P. (2016). Design approaches to experimental mediation. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 66, 29-38. doi:10.1016/j.jesp.2015.09.012
52.
PrattJ. W. (1964). Risk aversion in the small and in the large. Econometrica, 32, 122-136. doi:10.2307/1913738
53.
ReedA. E.ChanL.MikelsJ. A. (2014). Meta-analysis of the age-related positivity effect: Age differences in preferences for positive over negative information. Psychology and Aging, 29, 1-15. doi:10.1037/a0035194
54.
SacchiS.StancaL. (2014). Asymmetric perception of gains versus non-losses and losses versus non-gains: The causal role of regulatory focus. Journal of Behavioral Decision Making, 27, 48-56. doi:10.1002/bdm.1786
55.
Samanez-LarkinG. R.CarstensenL. L. (2011). Socioemotional functioning and the aging brain. In DecetyJ.CacioppoJ. T. (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of social neuroscience (pp. 507-521). New York, NY: Oxford University Press. doi:10.1093/oxfordhb/9780195342161.013.0034.
56.
ScholerA. A.ZouX.FujitaK.StroessnerS. J.HigginsE. T. (2010). When risk seeking becomes a motivational necessity. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 99, 215-231. doi:10.1037/a0019715
57.
SchryerE.RossM. (2014). Does the age-related positivity effect in autobiographical recall reflect differences in appraisal or memory?The Journals of Gerontology, Series B, 69, 548-556. doi:10.1093/geronb/gbt047
58.
SchwagerS.RothermundK. (2012). Motivation and affective processing biases in risky decision making: A counter-regulation account. Journal of Economic Psychology, 38, 111-126. doi:10.1016/j.joep.2012.08.005
59.
ShivB.LoewensteinG.BecharaA.DamasioH.DamasioA. R. (2005). Investment behavior and the negative side of emotion. Psychological Science, 16, 435-439. doi:10.1111/j.0956-7976.2005.01553.x
60.
SnowbergE.WolfersJ. (2010). Explaining the favorite–longshot bias: Is it risk-love or misperceptions?Journal of Political Economy, 118, 723-746. doi:10.1086/655844
61.
TverskyA.KahnemanD. (1981). The framing of decisions and the psychology of choice. Science, 211, 453-458. doi:10.1126/science.7455683
62.
ZouX.ScholerA. A.HigginsE. T. (2014). In pursuit of progress: Promotion motivation and risk preference in the domain of gains. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 106, 183-201. doi:10.1037/a0035391
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
