Scholarlink

<p>The framing of risky choices can shape and alter individuals’ risk preferences. Within every option in a risky choice (e.g., 70% chance to win $100), there is a naturally embedded but hidden zero outcome (e.g., 30% chance to win $0). Here, we tested the hidden-zero effect by comparing participants’ risky choices between two different conditions (i.e., presenting options with or without explicit-zero outcomes) with a full range of risky probabilities (5%–95%). The results showed that presenting zero outcomes explicitly led to more risky choices (Studies 1 and 2). Moreover, combining eye-movement measurement and computational modeling, we then developed a series of models based on Expected Utility and Prospect Theory to quantify the attentional process underlying this hidden-zero effect. These results demonstrated that the hidden-zero effect is primarily driven by a choice bias toward the risky option, which was mediated by increased visual attention to the risky option. These findings suggest that the utility of zero does not simply equal zero; rather, presenting the often-omitted zero components may shift individuals’ attention toward risky options, encouraging them to take more risks.</p>

错误：搜索内容不能为空，请输入英文关键词
错误：关键词超出字数限制，请精简
高级检索

Does zero mean nothing? Investigating the attentional mechanism of the hidden-zero effect in risky decision-making

  • 期刊论文

  • 发表日期：

    2026年5月11日

查看全文
  • Zhu-Yuan Liang,
  • Mingqian Guo,
  • Yuepei Xu,
  • Shu-Yu Liu,
  • Lei Zhang,
  • Lei Zhou

摘要

The framing of risky choices can shape and alter individuals’ risk preferences. Within every option in a risky choice (e.g., 70% chance to win $100), there is a naturally embedded but hidden zero outcome (e.g., 30% chance to win $0). Here, we tested the hidden-zero effect by comparing participants’ risky choices between two different conditions (i.e., presenting options with or without explicit-zero outcomes) with a full range of risky probabilities (5%–95%). The results showed that presenting zero outcomes explicitly led to more risky choices (Studies 1 and 2). Moreover, combining eye-movement measurement and computational modeling, we then developed a series of models based on Expected Utility and Prospect Theory to quantify the attentional process underlying this hidden-zero effect. These results demonstrated that the hidden-zero effect is primarily driven by a choice bias toward the risky option, which was mediated by increased visual attention to the risky option. These findings suggest that the utility of zero does not simply equal zero; rather, presenting the often-omitted zero components may shift individuals’ attention toward risky options, encouraging them to take more risks.