The study challenges the idea that most people make decisions based on expected utility theory. Instead, it suggests that human choices under risk are diverse, with rank-dependent utility models being more common than cumulative prospect theory. Loss-averse behavior is often due to how people weigh probabilities, not just the actual losses. This has implications for how we assess the effects of policies on welfare. Abandoning a strict belief in cumulative prospect theory can lead to a better understanding of human decision-making in economics.