These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


BIOMARKERS

Molecular Biopsy of Human Tumors

- a resource for Precision Medicine *

119 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 25347316)

  • 1. Quantitative tests of the Perceived Relative Argument Model: comment on Loomes (2010).
    Guo Y; Regenwetter M
    Psychol Rev; 2014 Oct; 121(4):696-705. PubMed ID: 25347316
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Quantitative tests of the Perceived Relative Argument Model: reply to Guo and Regenwetter (2014).
    Loomes G
    Psychol Rev; 2014 Oct; 121(4):706-10. PubMed ID: 25347317
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Cognitive models of risky choice: parameter stability and predictive accuracy of prospect theory.
    Glöckner A; Pachur T
    Cognition; 2012 Apr; 123(1):21-32. PubMed ID: 22226615
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Prospect relativity: how choice options influence decision under risk.
    Stewart N; Chater N; Stott HP; Reimers S
    J Exp Psychol Gen; 2003 Mar; 132(1):23-46. PubMed ID: 12656296
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Decision makers conceive of their choices as interventions.
    Hagmayer Y; Sloman SA
    J Exp Psychol Gen; 2009 Feb; 138(1):22-38. PubMed ID: 19203168
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Source preference and ambiguity aversion: models and evidence from behavioral and neuroimaging experiments.
    Chew SH; Li KK; Chark R; Zhong S
    Adv Health Econ Health Serv Res; 2008; 20():179-201. PubMed ID: 19552309
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Exaggerated risk: prospect theory and probability weighting in risky choice.
    Kusev P; van Schaik P; Ayton P; Dent J; Chater N
    J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn; 2009 Nov; 35(6):1487-505. PubMed ID: 19857019
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Prospect theory in the valuation of health.
    Moffett ML; Suarez-Almazor ME
    Expert Rev Pharmacoecon Outcomes Res; 2005 Aug; 5(4):499-505. PubMed ID: 19807267
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. An evaluation and comparison of models of risky intertemporal choice.
    Luckman A; Donkin C; Newell BR
    Psychol Rev; 2020 Nov; 127(6):1097-1138. PubMed ID: 32700921
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. New paradoxes of risky decision making.
    Birnbaum MH
    Psychol Rev; 2008 Apr; 115(2):463-501. PubMed ID: 18426300
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. When payoffs look like probabilities: Separating form and content in risky choice.
    Müller-Trede J; Sher S; McKenzie CRM
    J Exp Psychol Gen; 2018 May; 147(5):662-670. PubMed ID: 29745710
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Prospect balancing theory: Bounded rationality of drivers' speed choice.
    Schmidt-Daffy M
    Accid Anal Prev; 2014 Feb; 63():49-64. PubMed ID: 24269862
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. The falsifiability of actual decision-making models.
    Heathcote A; Wagenmakers EJ; Brown SD
    Psychol Rev; 2014 Oct; 121(4):676-8. PubMed ID: 25347313
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. The diffusion model is not a deterministic growth model: comment on Jones and Dzhafarov (2014).
    Smith PL; Ratcliff R; McKoon G
    Psychol Rev; 2014 Oct; 121(4):679-88. PubMed ID: 25347314
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Rigorously testing multialternative decision field theory against random utility models.
    Berkowitsch NA; Scheibehenne B; Rieskamp J
    J Exp Psychol Gen; 2014 Jun; 143(3):1331-48. PubMed ID: 24364681
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Risky choice and Weber's Law.
    Kacelnik A; Brito e Abreu F
    J Theor Biol; 1998 Sep; 194(2):289-98. PubMed ID: 9778440
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. The predictive validity of prospect theory versus expected utility in health utility measurement.
    Abellan-Perpiñan JM; Bleichrodt H; Pinto-Prades JL
    J Health Econ; 2009 Dec; 28(6):1039-47. PubMed ID: 19833400
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Complexity, attention, and choice in games under time constraints: A process analysis.
    Spiliopoulos L; Ortmann A; Zhang L
    J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn; 2018 Oct; 44(10):1609-1640. PubMed ID: 30198724
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Variance, skewness and multiple outcomes in described and experienced prospects: Can one descriptive model capture it all?
    Spiliopoulos L; Hertwig R
    J Exp Psychol Gen; 2023 Apr; 152(4):1188-1222. PubMed ID: 36442037
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Analyzability, ad hoc restrictions, and excessive flexibility of evidence-accumulation models: reply to two critical commentaries.
    Jones M; Dzhafarov EN
    Psychol Rev; 2014 Oct; 121(4):689-95. PubMed ID: 25347315
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 6.