1. Thaler R, Shefrin H. An economic theory of self-control. J Polit Economy. 1981;89:392–406.
2. Shefrin H, Thaler R. Mental accounting, saving, and self-control. In: Loewenstein G, Elster J, editors. Choice Over Time. Russell Sage Foundation; New York, NY: 1992.
3. Dawes RM. Behavioral decision making and judgment. In: Gilbert DT, Fiske ST, Lindzey G, editors. The Handbook of Social Psychology. 4. Oxford University Press; New York: 1998. pp. 497–548.
4. Casey BJ, Tottenham N, Liston C, Durston S. Imaging the developing brain: what have we learned about cognitive development? Trends Cogn Sci. 2005;9:104–110. [PubMed] 5. Park DC, Reuter-Lorenz P. The adaptive brain: aging and neurocognitive scaffolding. Rev Psychol. 2009;60:173–196. [PMC free article] [PubMed]
6. Chen Y, Sun Y. Age differences in financial decision-making: using simple heuristics. Ed Geron. 2003;29:627–635.
7. Denberg NL, Tranel D, Bechara A. The ability to decide advantageously declines prematurely in some normal older persons. Neuropsychologia. 2005;43:1099–1106. [PubMed]
8. Carstensen LL, Hartel CR. When I’m 64. The National Academies Press; Washington, DC: 2006.
9. Stanovich KE, Toplak ME, West RF. The development of rational thought: a taxonomy of heuristics and biases. In: Kail RV, Kail RV, editors. Advances in Child Development and Behavior. Vol. 36. Elsevier Academic Press; San Diego, CA: 2008. pp. 251–285. [PubMed]
10. Klaczynski PA. Cognitive and social cognitive development: dual-process research and theory. In: Evans JT, Frankish K, editors. In Two Minds: Dual Processes and Beyond. Oxford University Press; New York, NY: 2009. pp. 265–292.
11. De Neys W, Vanderputte K. When less is not always more: stereotype knowledge and reasoning development. Dev Psychol. 2011;47:432–441. [PubMed]
12. Peters E, Hess TM, Västfjäll D, Auman C. Adult age differences in dual information processes. Perspect Psychol Sci. 2007;2:1–23.
13. Horhota M, Blanchard-Fields F. Do beliefs and attributional complexity influence age differences in the correspondence bias? Soc Cognit. 2006;24:310–337.
14. Stanley J, Blanchard-Fields F. Beliefs about behavior account for age differences in the correspondence bias. J Gerontol: Psychol Sci. 2011;66:169–176. [PMC free article] [PubMed] 15. Bruine de Bruin W, Parker AM, Fischhoff B. Individual differences in adult decision-making competence. J Pers Soc Psychol. 2007;92:938–956. [PubMed] 16. Hansson P, Rönnlund M, Juslin P, Nilsson L. Adult age differences in the realism of confidence judgments: overconfidence, format dependence, and cognitive predictors. Psychol Aging. 2008;23:531–544. [PubMed] 17. Blanchard-Fields F, Hertzog C, Horhota M. Violate my beliefs? Then you’re to blame! Belief content as an explanation for causal attribution biases. Psychol Aging. In press. [PMC free article] [PubMed] 18. Bayen UJ, Erdfelder E, Bearden J, Lozito JP. The interplay of memory and judgment processes in effects of aging on hindsight bias. J Exp Psychol: Learn, Memory, Cogn. 2006;32:1003–1018. [PubMed] 19. Bernstein DM, Erdfelder E, Meltzoff AN, et al. Hindsight bias from 3 to 95 years of age. J Exp Psychol: Learn, Memory, Cogn. 2011;37:378–391. [PMC free article] [PubMed]
20. Arkes R, Ayton P. The sunk cost and Concorde effects: are humans less rational than lower animals? Psychol Bull. 1999;125:591–600.
21. Schwartz B. The sunk-cost fallacy: Bush falls victim to a bad new argument for the Iraq war. [accessed July 11, 2011];Slate. 2005 Available at: http://www.slate.com/id/2125910.
22. Heilbroner RL, Thurow LC. Understanding Microeconomics. Prentice Hall; Englewood Cliffs, NJ: 1981.
23. Tversky A, Kahneman D. The framing of decisions and the psychology of choice. Science. 1981;221:453–458. [PubMed] 24. Kühberger A. The influence of framing on risky decisions: a meta-analysis. Org Behav Hum Dec Proc. 1998;75:23–55. [PubMed] 25. Levin IP, Schneider SL, Gaeth GJ. All frames are not created equal: a typology and critical analysis of framing effects. Org Behav Hum Dec Proc. 1998;76:149–188. [PubMed] 26. Evans, StBT J. Dual-processing accounts of reasoning, judgement, and social cognition. Annu Rev Psychol. 2008;59:255–278. [PubMed] 27. Osman M. An evaluation of dual-process theories of reasoning. Psychon Bull Rev. 2004;11:988–1010. [PubMed] 28. Kahneman D. A perspective on judgment and choice: mapping bounded rationality. Am Psychol. 2003;58:697–720. [PubMed]
29. Jacobs JE, Klaczynski PA. The development of judgment and decision making during childhood and adolescence. Curr Dir Psychol Sci. 2002;11:145–149.
30. Reyna VF. How people make decisions that involve risk: a dual-process approach. Curr Dir Psychol Sci. 2004;13:60–66.
31. Rivers SE, V, Reyna F, Mills B. Risk taking under the influence: a fuzzy trace theory of emotion in adolescence. Dev Rev. 2008;28:107–144. [PMC free article] [PubMed]
32. Yates JF, Patalano AL. Decision making and aging. In: Park D, Morrell R, Shifren K, editors. Processing of Medical Information in Aging Patients: Cognitive and Human Factors Perspectives. Erlbaum; Mahwah, NJ: 1999. pp. 31–54.
33. Keren G, Schul Y. Two is not always better than one. Perspect Psychol Sci. 2009;4:533–550.
34. Barrett LF. Feeling is perceiving: core affect and conceptualization in the experience of emotion. In: Barrett LF, Niedenthal PM, Winkielman P, editors. Emotion and Consciousness. Guilford Press; New York, NY: 2005. pp. 255–284.
35. Baumeister RF, Vohs KD, DeWall CN, Zhang L. How emotion shapes behavior: feedback, anticipation, and reflection, rather than direct causation. Pers Soc Psychol Rev. 2007;11:167–203. [PubMed]
36. Bechara A, Damasio AR. The somatic marker hypothesis: a neural theory of economic decision. Games Econ Behav. 2005;52:336–372.
37. Loewenstein GF, Weber EU, Hsee CK, Welch N. Risk as feelings. Psychol Bull. 2003;127:267–286. [PubMed]
38. Peters E, Dieckmann NE, Weller J. Age differences in complex decision making. In: Warner SK, Willis SL, editors. Handbook of the Psychology of Aging. 7. Elsevier Academic Press; San Diego, CA: 2010. pp. 133–148.
39. Gigerenzer G. Why heuristics work. Perspect Pyschol Sci. 2008;3:20–29.
40. Baltes PB, Lindenberger U, Staudinger UM. Life span theory in developmental psychology. In: Lerner RM, Damon W, editors. Handbook of Child Psychology. 6. Vol. 1. John Wiley & Sons; Hoboken, NJ: 2006. pp. 1029–1143. Theoretical Models of Human Development.
41. Blanchard-Fields F, Brannan JR, Camp CJ. Alternative conceptions of wisdom: an onion-peeling exercise. Ed Geron. 1987;13:497–503.
42. Amieva H, Phillips LH, Della Sala S. Behavioral dysexecutive symptoms in normal aging. Brain Cog. 2003;53:129–132. [PubMed] 43. Jurado MB, Rosselli M. The elusive nature of executive functions: a review of our current understanding. Neuropsychol Rev. 2007;17:213–233. [PubMed] 44. Park DC, Lautenschlager G, Hedden T, et al. Models of visuospatial and verbal memory across the adult life span. Psychol Aging. 2002;17:299–320. [PubMed]
45. Salthouse TA. What and when of cognitive aging. Curr Dir Psychol Sci. 2004;13:140–144.
46. Salthouse TA. Selective review of cognitive aging. J Int Neropsychol Soc. 2010;16:754–760. [PMC free article] [PubMed] 47. Schaie WK, Willis SL, Caskie GIL. The Seattle longitudinal study: relationship between personality and cognition. Aging, Neuropsychol Cog. 2004;11:304–324. [PMC free article] [PubMed] 48. Samanez-Larkin GR, Gibbs SB, Khanna K, et al. Anticipation of monetary gain but not loss in healthy older adults. Nat Neurosci. 2007;10:787–791. [PMC free article] [PubMed] 49. Denburg NL, Recknor EC, Bechara A, Tranel D. Psychophysiological anticipation of positive outcomes promotes advantageous decision-making in normal older persons. Int’l J Psychophysiol. 2006;61:19–25. [PubMed] 50. Charles ST, Carstensen LL. Social and emotional aging. Ann Rev Psychol. 2010;61:383–409. [PubMed] 51. Carstensen LL, Turan B, Scheibe S, et al. Emotional experience improves with age: evidence based on over 10 years of experience sampling. Psychol Aging. 2011;26:21–33. [PMC free article] [PubMed] 52. Blanchard-Fields F. Flexible and adaptive socio-emotional problem solving in adult development and aging. Restorative Neurol Neurosci. 2009;27:539–550. [PubMed] 53. Charles ST. Strength and vulnerability integration: a model of emotional well-being across adulthood. Psychol Bull. 2010;136:1068–1091. [PMC free article] [PubMed] 54. Labouvie-Vief G. Cognition and equilibrium regulation in development and aging. Restorative Neurol Neurosci. 2009;27:551–565. [PubMed]
55. Bronfenbrenner U, Morris PA. Handbook of child psychology. 6. Vol. 1. John Wiley & Sons, Inc; Hoboken, NJ: 2006. The bioecological model of human development; pp. 793–828. Theoretical Models of Human Development.
56. Carstensen LL. The influence of a sense of time on human development. Science. 2006;312:1913–1915. [PMC free article] [PubMed] 57. Carstensen LL, Isaacowitz DM, Charles ST. Taking time seriously: a theory of socioemotional selectivity. Am Psychol. 1999;54:165–181. [PubMed]
58. Berg CA, Strough J. Problem solving across the life span. In: Fingerman KL, Berg CA, Smith J, Antonucci TC, editors. Handbook of Life-Span Development. Springer; New York, NY: 2010. pp. 239–267.
59. Carstensen LL, Mikels JA. At the intersection of emotion and cognition: aging and the positively effect. Curr Dir Psychol Sci. 2005;14:117–121.
60. Mather M, Carstensen LL. Aging and attentional biases for emotional faces. Psychol Sci. 2003;14:409–415. [PubMed]
61. Baumeister RF, Bratslavsky E, Finkenauer C, Vohs KD. Bad is stronger than good. Rev Gen Psychol. 2001;5:323–370.
62. Rozin P, Royzman EB. Negativity bias, negativity dominance, and contagion. Pers Soc Psychol Rev. 2001;5:296–320.
63. Kim S, Hasher L. The attraction effect in decision making: superior performance by older adults. Quarterly J Exp Psychol. 2005;58:120–133. [PMC free article] [PubMed] 64. Tentori K, Osherson D, Hasher L, May C. Wisdom and aging: irrational preferences in college students but not older adults. Cognition. 2001;81:B87–B96. [PubMed]
65. Arkes HR, Blumer C. The psychology of sunk cost. Org Behav Hum Dec Proc. 1985;35:124–140.
66. Staw BM, Hoang H. Sunk costs in the NBA: why draft order affects playing time and survival in professional basketball. Admin Sci Quart. 1995;40:474–494.
67. Staw BM, Barside SG, Kapot KW. Escalation at the credit window: a longitudinal study of bank executives’ recognition and write-off of problem loans. J Appl Psychol. 1997;82:130–142.
68. Brockner J. The escalation of commitment to a failing course of action: toward theoretical progress. Acad Manage Rev. 1992;17:39–61.
69. Cunha M, Caldieraro F. Sunk-cost effects on purely behavioral investments. Cog Sci. 2009;33:105–113. [PubMed]
70. Friedman D, Pommerenke K, Lukose R, et al. Searching for the sunk cost fallacy. Exp Econ. 2007;10:79–104.
71. Ting H. The effects of goal distance and value in escalation of commitment. Curr Psychol. 2011;30:93–104.
72. Ting H, Wallsten TS. A query theory account of the effect of memory retrieval on the sunk cost bias. Psychon Bull Rev. 2011;18:767–773. [PubMed]
73. Coleman MD. Sunk cost and commitment to medical treatment. Curr Psychol. 2010;29:121–134.
74. Frisch D. Reasons for framing effects. Org Behav Hum Dec Proc. 1993;54:399–429.
75. Coleman MD. Sunk cost and commitment to dates arranged online. Curr Psychol. 2009;28:45–54.
76. Coleman MD. Sunk cost, emotion, and commitment to education. Curr Psychol. 2010;29:346–356.
77. Molden DC, Hui CM. Promoting de-escalation of commitment: a regulatory-focus perspective on sunk costs. Psychol Sci. 2011;22:8–12. [PubMed] 78. Navarro AD, Fantino E. The sunk-time effect: an exploration. J Behav Dec Making. 2009;22:252–270. [PMC free article] [PubMed] 79. Karlsson N, Juliusson EÁ, Grankvist G, Gärling T. Impact of decision goal on escalation. Acta Psychol. 2002;111:309–322. [PubMed] 80. Juliusson Á. Optimism as modifier of escalation of commitment. Scand J Psychol. 2006;47:345–348. [PubMed]
81. Thames EA. The sunk-cost effect: the importance of context. J Soc Behav Pers. 1996;11:817–826.
82. Soman D. The mental accounting of sunk time costs: why time is not like money. J Behav Dec Making. 2001;14:169–185.
83. Arkes HR, Hutzel L. The role of probability of success estimates in the sunk cost effect. J Behav Dec Making. 2000;13:295–306.
84. Beeler JD, Hunton JE. The influence of compensation method and disclosure level on information search strategy and escalation of commitment. J Behav Dec Making. 1997;10:77–91.
85. Fox FV, Staw BM. The trapped administrator: effects of job insecurity and policy resistance upon commitment to a course of action. Admin Sci Quart. 1979;24:449–471.
86. Garland H, Newport S. Effects of absolute and relative sunk costs on the decision to persist with a course of action. Org Behav Hum Dec Proc. 1991;48:55–69.
87. Keil M, Truex DP, II, Mixon R. The effects of sunk cost and project completion on information technology project escalation. Trans Eng Manage. 1995;42:372–381.
88. Staw BM. Knee-deep in the big muddy: a study of escalating commitment to a chosen course of action. Organ Behav Hum Perform. 1976;16:27–44.
89. Soster RL, Monga A, Bearden WO. Tracking costs of time and money: how accounting periods affect mental accounting. J Consum Res. 2010;37:712–721.
90. Navarro AD, Fantino E. The sunk cost effect in pigeons and humans. J Exp Anal Behav. 2005;83:1–13. [PMC free article] [PubMed]
91. Klaczynski PA. Framing effects on adolescent task representations, analytic and heuristic processing, and decision making implications for the normative/descriptive gap. Appl Dev Psychol. 2001;22:289–309.
92. Strough J, Mehta CM, McFall JP, Schuller KL. Are older adults less subject to the sunk-cost fallacy than younger adults? Psychol Sci. 2008;19:650–652. [PubMed]
93. Harvey P, Victoravich LM. The influence of forward-looking antecedents, uncertainty, and anticipatory emotions on project escalation. Dec Sci. 2009;40:759–782.
94. Boehne DM, Paese PW. Deciding whether to complete or terminate an unfinished project: a strong test of the project completion hypothesis. Org Behav Hum Dec Proc. 2000;81:178–194. [PubMed]
95. Garland H, Conlan DE. Too close to quit: the role of project completion in maintaining commitment. J Appl Soc Psychol. 1998;28:2025–2048.
96. Hastie R, Dawes RM. Rational choice in an uncertain world: the psychology and judgment and decision making. Sage; Thousand Oaks, CA: 2001. pp. 25–46.
97. Heath C. Escalation and de-escalation of commitment in response to sunk costs: the role of budgeting in mental accounting. Org Behav Hum Dec Proc. 1995;62:38–54.
98. Shafir E, Thaler RH. Invest now, drink later, spend never: on the mental accounting of delayed consumption. J Econ Psychol. 2006;27:694–712.
99. Bornstein BH, Chapman GB. Learning lessons from sunk costs. J Exp Psychol: Appl. 1995;1:251–269.
100. Soman D. Framing, loss aversion, and mental accounting. In: Koehler DJ, Harvey N, editors. Blackwell Handbook of Judgment and Decision Making. Blackwell; Malden, MA: 2004. pp. 379–398.
101. Arkes HR. The psychology of waste. J Behav Dec Making. 1996;9:213–214.
102. Stanovich KE, West RF. On the relative independence of thinking biases and cognitive ability. J Pers Soc Psychol. 2008;4:672–695. [PubMed]
103. West RF, Toplak ME, Stanovich KE. Heuristics and biases as measures of critical thinking: associations with cognitive ability and thinking dispositions. J Edu Psychol. 2008;100:930–941.
104. Kokis JV, Macpherson R, Toplak ME, et al. Heuristic and analytic processing: age trends and associations with cognitive ability and cognitive styles. J Exp Child Psychol. 2002;83:26–52. [PubMed]
105. Stanovich KE, West RF. Individual differences in framing and conjunction effects. Think Reason. 1998;4:289–317.
106. Stanovich KE, West RF. Discrepancies between normative and descriptive models of decision making and the understanding/acceptance principle. Cogn Psychol. 1999;38:349–385. [PubMed] 107. Morsanyi K, Handley SJ. How smart do you need to be to get it wrong? The role of cognitive capacity in the development of heuristic-based judgment. J Exp Child Psychol. 2008;99:18–36. [PubMed]
108. Bruine de Bruin W, Parker AM, Fischhoff B. Explaining adult age differences in decision-making competence. J Behav Dec Making. 2010 In press.
109. Del Missier F, Mäntyalä T, Bruine de Bruin W. Executive functions in decision making: an individual differences approach. Think Reason. 2010;2:69–97.
110. Parker AM, Fischhoff B. Decision-making competence: external validation through an individual-differences approach. J Behav Dec Making. 2005;18:1–27.
111. Arkes HR. Costs and benefits of judgment errors: implications for debiasing. Psychol Bull. 1991;110:486–498.
112. Garland H, Sandefur CA, Rogers AC. De-escalation of commitment in oil exploration: when sunk costs and negative feedback coincide. J Appl Psychol. 1990;75:721–727.
113. Hun Tong T, Yates JF. Sunk cost effects: the influences of instruction and future return estimates. Org Behav Hum Dec Proc. 1995;63:311–319.
114. Bornstein BH, Emler C, Chapman GB. Rationality in medical treatment decisions: is there a sunk-cost effect? Soc Sci Med. 1999;49:215–222. [PubMed]
115. Fennema MG, Perkins JD. Mental budgeting versus marginal decision making: training, experience and sunk costs. J Behav Dec Making. 2008;21:225–239.
116. van Putten M, Zeelenberg M, van Dijk E. Who throws good money after bad? Action vs. state orientation moderates the sunk-cost fallacy. Judgment Dec Making. 2010;5:33–36.
117. Wong KFE, Yik M, Kwong JYY. Understanding the emotional aspects of escalation of commitment: the role of negative affect. J Appl Psychol. 2006;91:282–297. [PubMed]
118. Baron J, Granato L, Spranca M, Teubal E. Decision making biases in children and early adolescents: exploratory studies. Merrill Palmer Q. 1993;39:23–47.
119. Klaczynski PA, Cottrell JM. A dual-process approach to cognitive development: the case of children’s understanding of sunk cost decisions. Think Reason. 2004;10:147–174.
120. Jacques S, Marcovitch S. Development of executive function across the life span. In: Overton WF, Lerner RM, editors. The Handbook of Life-Span Development. Vol. 1: Cognition, Biology, and Methods. John Wiley & Sons; Hoboken, NJ: 2010. pp. 431–466.
121. Klaczynski PA. Motivated scientific reasoning biases, epistemological beliefs, and theory polarization: a two-process approach to adolescent cognition. Child Dev. 2000;71:1347–1366. [PubMed] 122. Klaczynski PA, Narasimham G. Development of scientific reasoning biases: cognitive versus ego-protective explanations. Dev Psychol. 1998;34:175–187. [PubMed] 123. Strough J, Schlosnagle L, DiDonato L. Understanding decisions about sunk costs from older and younger adults’ perspectives. J Gerontol: Psychol Sci. 2011 In press. [PubMed] 124. Henninger DE, Madden DJ, Huettel SA. Processing speed and memory mediate age-related differences in decision making. Psychol Aging. 2010;25:262–270. [PMC free article] [PubMed] 125. Mata R, Schooler LJ, Rieskamp J. The aging decision maker: cognitive aging and the adaptive selection of decision strategies. Psychol Aging. 2007;22:796–810. [PubMed]
126. Levin IP, Hart SS. Risk preferences in young children: early evidence of individual differences in reaction to potential gains and losses. J Behav Dec Making. 2003;16:397–413.
127. Reyna VF, Ellis SC. Fuzzy-trace theory and framing effects in children’s risky decision making. Psychol Sci. 1994;5:275–279.
128. Reyna VF, Estrada SM, DeMarinis JA, et al. Neurobiological and memory models of risky decision making in adolescents versus young adults. J Exp Psychol: Learn Memory, Cogn. 2011;37:1125–1142. [PubMed]
129. Schlottmann A, Tring J. How children reason about gains and losses: framing effects in judgment and choice. Swiss J Psychol. 2005;64:153–171.
130. Weller JA, I, Levin P, Denburg NL. Trajectory of adaptive decision making for risky gains and losses from ages 5 to 85. J Behav Dec Making. 2009;22:1–14.
131. Mikels JA, Reed AE. Monetary losses do not loom large in later life: age differences in the framing effect. J Gerontol: Psychol Sci. 2009;64B:457–460. [PMC free article] [PubMed] 132. Mata R, Josef A, Samanez-Larkin G, Hertwig R. Age differences in risky choice: a meta-analysis. Ann NY Acad Sci. 2011;1235:18–29. This volume. [PMC free article] [PubMed] 133. Rönnlund M, Karlsson E, Laggnäs E, Larsson L, Lindström T. Risky decision making across three are-nas of choice: are younger and older adults differently susceptible to framing effects? J General Psychol. 2005;132:81–92. [PubMed] 134. Wang XT. Domain-specific rationality in human choices: violations of utility axioms and social contexts. Cognition. 1996;60:31–63. [PubMed] 135. McNeil BJ, Pauker SG, Sox HC, Jr, Tversky A. On the elicitation of preferences for alternative therapies. N Engl J Med. 1982;27:1259–1262. [PubMed] 136. Weller JA, I, Levin P, Shiv B, Bechara A. Neural correlates of adaptive decision making for risky gains and losses. Psychol Sci. 2007;18:958–964. [PubMed]
137. Levin IP, Hart SS, Weller JA, Harshman LA. Stability of choices in a risky decision-making task: a 3-year longitudinal study with children and adults. J Behav Dec Making. 2007;20:241–252.
138. Wang XT. Risk communication and risky choice in context: ambiguity and ambivalence hypothesis. Ann NY Acad Sci. 2008;1128:78–89. [PubMed]
139. Kühberger A, Tanner C. Risky choice framing: task versions and a comparison of prospect theory and fuzzy-trace theory. J Behav Dec Making. 2010;23:314–329.
140. Loke WH, Tan KF. Effects of framing and missing information in expert and novice judgement. Bull Psychon Soc. 1992;30:187–190.
141. Roszkowski MJ, Snelbecker GE. Effects of “framing” on measures of risk tolerance: financial planners are not immune. J Behav Econ. 1990;19:237–246.
142. Levin IP, Gaeth GJ, Schreiber J, Lauriola M. A new look at framing effects: distribution of effect sizes, individual differences, and independence of types of effects. Org Behav Hum Dec Proc. 2002;88:411–429.
143. Smith SM, Levin IP. Need for cognition and choice framing effects. J Behav Dec Making. 1996;9:283–290.
144. Kim S, Goldstein D, Hasher L, Zacks RT. Framing effects in younger and older adults. J Gerontol: Psychol Sci. 2005;60B:215–218. [PMC free article] [PubMed] 145. Almashat S, Ayotte B, Edelstein B, Margrett J. Framing effect debiasing in medical decision making. Patient Ed Couns. 2008;71:102–107. [PubMed]
146. Sieck W, Yates JF. Exposition effects on decision making: choice and confidence in choice. Org Behav Hum Dec Proc. 1997;70:207–219.
147. Takemura K. Influence of elaboration on the framing of decision. J Psychol. 1994;128:33–39.
148. Gray JA. The psychophysiological basis of introversion-extraversion. Behav Res Ther. 1970;8:249–266. [PubMed] 149. Reyna VF, Rivers SE. Current theories of risk and rational decision making. Dev Rev. 2008;28:1–11. [PMC free article] [PubMed]
150. Reyna VF, Farley F. Risk and rationality in adolescent decision making: implications for theory, practice, and public policy. Psychol Sci Pub Interest. 2006;7:1–44.
151. Bruine de Bruin W. Judgment and decision making in adolescents. In: Dhani MK, Schlotmann A, Waldmann W, editors. Judgment and Decision Making as a Skill: Learning, Development, and Evolution. Cambridge University Press; Cambridge, UK: In press.
152. Schlottman A, Wilkening F. Judgment and decision making in young children: probability, expected value, belief updating, heuristics and biases. In: Dhami MK, Schlottmann A, Waldmann M, editors. Judgment and Decision Making as a Skill: Learning, Development, and Evolution. Cambridge University Press; Cambridge, UK: In press.
153. Chien YC, Lin C, Worthley J. Effect of framing on adolescents’ decision making. Percept Mot Skills. 1996;83:811–819. [PubMed]
154. Wang XT, Simons F, Bredart S. Social cues and verbal framing in risky choice. J Behav Dec Making. 2001;14:1–15.
155. Holliday SG. Risky-choice behavior: a life-span analysis. Int’l J Aging Hum Dev. 1988;27:25–33. [PubMed] 156. Mayhorn CB, Fisk AD, Whittle JD. Decisions, decisions: analysis of age, cohort, and time of testing on framing of risky decision options. Hum Factors: J Hum Factors Ergon Soc. 2002;44:515–521. [PubMed] 157. Woodhead EL, Lynch EB, Edelstein BA. Decisional strategy determines whether frame influences treatment preferences for medical decisions. Psychol Aging. 2011;26:285–294. [PubMed] 158. Peters E, Västfjäll D, Slovic P, et al. Numeracy and decision making. Psychol Sci. 2006;17:407–413. [PubMed] 159. Finucane ML, Gullion CM. Developing a tool for measuring the decision-making competence of older adults. Psychol Aging. 2010;25:271–288. [PMC free article] [PubMed]
160. Strough J, Cheng S, Swenson LM. Preferences for collaborative and individual everyday problem solving in later adulthood. Int J Behav Dev. 2002;26:26–35.
161. Baltes PB, Smith J. Multilevel and systematic analyses of old age: theoretical and empirical evidence for a fourth age. In: Bengston VL, Schaie KW, editors. Handbook of Theories of Aging. Springer; New York, NY: 1999. pp. 153–173.