But that's not what the research was about, if I'm understanding it correctly (the research has been mentioned a lot in popular economics literature, so I think

But that's not what the research was about, if I'm understanding it correctly (the research has been mentioned a lot in popular economics literature, so I think that I am understanding it correctly, at least at the high level). The conclusion of the research is that people are more risk-averse when it comes to losses - i.e. they'd rather not win 100$ than loose 100$. If I'm understanding you correctly, you're saying it's about the amounts; and I think I'd have to agree with you that for the examples to be equivalent, the amounts in 5b should be multiplied by 10. But then again, maybe that would introduce another comprehension hurdle or cognitive correction effect which would render the experiment invalid. Interesting question to ask the original researchers, although I presume that by now (after decades) they've addressed it somewhere already :)