Dataset Information

Measuring and Controlling for the Compromise Effect When Estimating Risk Preference Parameters.

ABSTRACT: The compromise effect arises when being close to the "middle" of a choice set makes an option more appealing. The compromise effect poses conceptual and practical problems for economic research: by influencing choices, it can bias researchers' inferences about preference parameters. To study this bias, we conduct an experiment with 550 participants who made choices over lotteries from multiple price lists (MPLs). Following prior work, we manipulate the compromise effect to influence choices by varying the middle options of each MPL. We then estimate risk preferences using a discrete-choice model without a compromise effect embedded in the model. As anticipated, the resulting risk preference parameter estimates are not robust, changing as the compromise effect is manipulated. To disentangle risk preference parameters from the compromise effect and to measure the strength of the compromise effect, we augment our discrete-choice model with additional parameters that represent a rising penalty for expressing an indifference point further from the middle of the ordered MPL. Using this method, we estimate an economically significant magnitude for the compromise effect and generate robust estimates of risk preference parameters that are no longer sensitive to compromise-effect manipulations.

SUBMITTER: Beauchamp JP

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7747750 | biostudies-literature | 2020 Dec

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Measuring and Controlling for the Compromise Effect When Estimating Risk Preference Parameters.

Beauchamp Jonathan P JP Benjamin Daniel J DJ Laibson David I DI Chabris Christopher F CF

Experimental economics 20191223 4

The compromise effect arises when being close to the "middle" of a choice set makes an option more appealing. The compromise effect poses conceptual and practical problems for economic research: by influencing choices, it can bias researchers' inferences about preference parameters. To study this bias, we conduct an experiment with 550 participants who made choices over lotteries from multiple price lists (MPLs). Following prior work, we manipulate the compromise effect to influence choices by v ...[more]

PMID: 33343223

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundThe biomarker discovery field is replete with molecular signatures that have not translated into the clinic despite ostensibly promising performance in predicting disease phenotypes. One widely cited reason is lack of classification consistency, largely due to failure to maintain performance from study to study. This failure is widely attributed to variability in data collected for the same phenotype among disparate studies, due to technical factors unrelated to phenotypes (e.g., laboratory settings resulting in "batch-effects") and non-phenotype-associated biological variation in the underlying populations. These sources of variability persist in new data collection technologies.MethodsHere we quantify the impact of these combined "study-effects" on a disease signature's predictive performance by comparing two types of validation methods: ordinary randomized cross-validation (RCV), which extracts random subsets of samples for testing, and inter-study validation (ISV), which excludes an entire study for testing. Whereas RCV hardwires an assumption of training and testing on identically distributed data, this key property is lost in ISV, yielding systematic decreases in performance estimates relative to RCV. Measuring the RCV-ISV difference as a function of number of studies quantifies influence of study-effects on performance.ResultsAs a case study, we gathered publicly available gene expression data from 1,470 microarray samples of 6 lung phenotypes from 26 independent experimental studies and 769 RNA-seq samples of 2 lung phenotypes from 4 independent studies. We find that the RCV-ISV performance discrepancy is greater in phenotypes with few studies, and that the ISV performance converges toward RCV performance as data from additional studies are incorporated into classification.ConclusionsWe show that by examining how fast ISV performance approaches RCV as the number of studies is increased, one can estimate when "sufficient" diversity has been achieved for learning a molecular signature likely to translate without significant loss of accuracy to new clinical settings.

Project description:Fecal egg count (FEC) is an indicative measurement for parasite infection in sheep. Different FEC methods may show inconsistent results. Not accounting for inconsistencies can be problematic when integrating measurements from different FEC methods for genetic evaluation. The objectives of this study were to evaluate the difference in means and variances between two fecal egg counting methods used in sheep-the Modified McMaster (LMMR) and the Triple Chamber McMaster (LTCM); to estimate variance components for the two FEC methods, treating them as two different traits; and to integrate FEC data from the two different methods and estimate genetic parameters for FEC and other gastrointestinal parasite resistance traits. Fecal samples were collected from a commercial Rideau-Arcott sheep farm in Ontario. Fecal egg counting was performed using both LMMR and the LTCM methods. Other parasite resistance trait records were collected from the same farm including eye score (FAMACHA), body condition score (BCS), and body weight (WT). The two FEC methods were highly genetically (0.94) and phenotypically (0.88) correlated. However, the mean and variance between the two FEC methods were significantly different (P < 0.0001). Therefore, re-scaling is required prior to integrating data from the different methods. For the multiple trait analysis, data from the two fecal egg counting methods were integrated (LFEC) by using records for the LMMR when available and replacing missing records with re-standardized LTCM records converted to the same mean and variance of LMMR. Heritability estimates were 0.12 ± 0.04, 0.07 ± 0.05, 0.17 ± 0.06, and 0.24 ± 0.07 for LFEC egg count, FAMACHA, BCS, and WT, respectively. The estimated genetic correlations between FEC and the other parasite resistance traits were low and not significant (P > 0.05) for FAMACHA (r = 0.24 ± 0.32) and WT (r = 0.22 ± 0.19), and essentially zero for BCS (r = -0.03 ± 0.25), suggesting little to no benefit of using such traits as indicators for LFEC.

Project description:Importance;Copy number variants (CNVs) classified as pathogenic are identified in 10% to 15% of patients referred for neurodevelopmental disorders. However, their effect sizes on cognitive traits measured as a continuum remain mostly unknown because most of them are too rare to be studied individually using association studies.ObjectiveTo measure and estimate the effect sizes of recurrent and nonrecurrent CNVs on IQ.Design, setting, and participantsThis study identified all CNVs that were 50 kilobases (kb) or larger in 2 general population cohorts (the IMAGEN project and the Saguenay Youth Study) with measures of IQ. Linear regressions, including functional annotations of genes included in CNVs, were used to identify features to explain their association with IQ. Validation was performed using intraclass correlation that compared IQ estimated by the model with empirical data.Main outcomes and measuresPerformance IQ (PIQ), verbal IQ (VIQ), and frequency of de novo CNV events.ResultsThe study included 2090 European adolescents from the IMAGEN study and 1983 children and parents from the Saguenay Youth Study. Of these, genotyping was performed on 1804 individuals from IMAGEN and 977 adolescents, 445 mothers, and 448 fathers (484 families) from the Saguenay Youth Study. We observed 4928 autosomal CNVs larger than 50 kb across both cohorts. For rare deletions, size, number of genes, and exons affect IQ, and each deleted gene is associated with a mean (SE) decrease in PIQ of 0.67 (0.19) points (P = 6 × 10-4); this is not so for rare duplications and frequent CNVs. Among 10 functional annotations, haploinsufficiency scores best explain the association of any deletions with PIQ with a mean (SE) decrease of 2.74 (0.68) points per unit of the probability of being loss-of-function intolerant (P = 8 × 10-5). Results are consistent across cohorts and unaffected by sensitivity analyses removing pathogenic CNVs. There is a 0.75 concordance (95% CI, 0.39-0.91) between the effect size on IQ estimated by our model and IQ loss calculated in previous studies of 15 recurrent CNVs. There is a close association between effect size on IQ and the frequency at which deletions occur de novo (odds ratio, 0.86; 95% CI, 0.84-0.87; P = 2.7 × 10-88). There is a 0.76 concordance (95% CI, 0.41-0.91) between de novo frequency estimated by the model and calculated using data from the DECIPHER database.Conclusions and relevanceModels trained on nonpathogenic deletions in the general population reliably estimate the effect size of pathogenic deletions and suggest omnigenic associations of haploinsufficiency with IQ. This represents a new framework to study variants too rare to perform individual association studies and can help estimate the cognitive effect of undocumented deletions in the neurodevelopmental clinic.

Dataset Information

Measuring and Controlling for the Compromise Effect When Estimating Risk Preference Parameters.

Publications

Measuring and Controlling for the Compromise Effect When Estimating Risk Preference Parameters.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets