Good And Bad Treatment Case Study

4. Experimental Results Of the 90 subjects, there are 33 male and 57 female. There are 13 male and 17 female in good treatment, 11 male and 19 female in bad treatment and 9 male and 21 female in neutral treatment.
Result 1: Subjects who received bad fortune telling are more risk averse in gain and loss situation than neutral fortune telling. Moreover, subjects who received good fortune telling affects subjects to be more risk averse in loss situation than neutral fortune telling.
In table 4.1, we compare number of safe choices from good and bad treatment with neutral treatment by using t-test. We determine neutral treatment is a control group. We found that in gain situation, subjects in bad treatment choose more safe choices than those in control group significantly, but subjects in good treatment choose more safe choices than those in control group insignificantly. In loss situation, subjects in both good and bad treatments significantly choose more safe choices than those in control group. In loss aversion situation, subjects in both good and bad treatments choose more safe choices than control group insignificantly.
The result of bad treatment is the same as our expectation that
In gain and loss aversion situations, subjects in good treatment who much belief in horoscope choose less safe choices than subjects who less belief in horoscope. On the other hand, subjects in bad treatment who much belief in horoscope choose more safe choices than subjects who less belief in horoscope. In loss situation, subjects in both good and bad treatments who much belief in horoscope choose more safe choices than subjects who less belief in horoscope. Moreover, good treatment has positive and significant effect on number of safe choices, so subjects in good treatment are more risk averse significantly than other