The full text of this article hosted at iucr.org is unavailable due to technical difficulties.

Research Dialogue

The Loss of Loss Aversion: Paying Attention to Reference Points

E. Tory Higgins

Corresponding Author

E-mail address: tory@psych.columbia.edu

Columbia University

Correspondence concerning this article should be addressed to E. Tory Higgins, Department of Psychology, Columbia University, 401‐D Schermerhorn Hall, 10027 New York, NY, USA. Electronic mail may be sent to

E-mail address: tory@psych.columbia.edu

.
Search for more papers by this author
First published: 30 March 2018
Cited by: 3

Accepted by Sharon Shavitt, Associate Editor

Abstract

We agree with Gal and Rucker (2018, in press) that loss aversion is not as firmly established as typically assumed. We affirm, however, the more general principle put forward within Prospect Theory (D. Kahneman & A. Tversky, 1979), which is that reference points increase people's sensitivity to objective changes in value. We show how the literatures on counterfactual thought, social comparison, and goal pursuit are consistent with the notion that reference points increase sensitivity to change in value, while not being consistent with loss aversion. We then examine, within the framework of Regulatory Focus theory (E. T. Higgins, 1997, 1998), how different reference points combine with characteristics of the actor and the situation to give rise to loss aversion (more sensitivity to negative outcomes than to positive outcomes) as well as to the reverse pattern (more sensitivity to positive outcomes than to negative outcomes). Our review suggests that the status quo, even when used as a reference point, is not necessarily neutral. It also suggests that anchor points other than the status quo may serve as reference points and that people may use more than one reference point simultaneously. More generally, we call for a critical examination of the “bad is stronger than good” principle.

Number of times cited: 3

  • , Loss Aversion, Intellectual Inertia, and a Call for a More Contrarian Science: A Reply to Simonson & Kivetz and Higgins & Liberman, Journal of Consumer Psychology, , (2018).
  • , Promotion or Prevention Messaging?: A Field Study on What Works When You Still Have to Work, Frontiers in Psychology, 10.3389/fpsyg.2018.01990, 9, (2018).
  • , Age Attenuates the Negativity Bias in Reframing Effects, Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 10.1177/0146167218804526, (014616721880452), (2018).