Talk:Pseudocertainty effect

	Psychology portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Psychology, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Psychology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PsychologyWikipedia:WikiProject PsychologyTemplate:WikiProject Psychologypsychology articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

Philosophy: Logic Low‑importance

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Philosophy, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of content related to philosophy on Wikipedia. If you would like to support the project, please visit the project page, where you can get more details on how you can help, and where you can join the general discussion about philosophy content on Wikipedia.PhilosophyWikipedia:WikiProject PhilosophyTemplate:WikiProject PhilosophyPhilosophy articles

Low

This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Associated task forces:
/
	Logic

Untitled[edit]

I will be editing this page and trying to elaborate and clarify on the concept in addition to distinguishing it from Certainty effect and Loss aversion. Bananabread7 (talk) 03:18, 7 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

It's not clear why is it called pseudo-certainty. What is so apparently certain about it? The introductory paragraph should be rewritten to explain it in general terms (so that one could understand it without the help of the example). Paranoid 00:42, 26 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment[edit]

This article is or was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Bananabread7.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 07:23, 17 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Fair use rationale for Image:Pyat rublei 1997.jpg[edit]

Image:Pyat rublei 1997.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot 11:33, 6 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Similarity to Loss aversion[edit]

Same example, too. Just thought someone should point it out. --124.120.193.149 (talk) 09:28, 15 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

page entirely wrong - pseudocertainty is something else[edit]

The example is awful because the expected values are extremely different, proportionally, comparing A vs. C and B vs. D98.225.76.162 (talk) 22:03, 21 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

This page is simply entirely wrong. This is just not what the pseudocertainty effect is.

See e.g. http://econlog.econlib.org/archives/2009/07/government_heal.html.

--75.101.20.150 (talk) 00:14, 3 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Bad Example[edit]

The example is not very illustrative because the expected values are extremely different, proportionally, comparing C vs. E and D vs. F. The difference in utility between $7.50 and %9 is not the same as the different in utility between $30 and $36. 98.225.76.162 (talk) 22:03, 21 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Same article[edit]

This is a re-written, but otherwise identical, article as Certainty effect. --Ben Culture (talk) 17:14, 11 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The other article is understandable, while this one has issues with both grammar and clarity. Perhaps this one should be removed and simply redirect to the other one? -AlanUS (talk) 21:22, 18 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Pseudocertainty effect. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

Corrected formatting/usage for //www.cs.umu.se/kurser/TDBC12/HT99/Tversky.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 10:33, 2 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]