Eight choice scenarios were used to test Linville and Fischer's (1991) Renewable Resources Model, which predicts that people will prefer to separate multiple gains over time and also to separate multiple losses over time, the latter prediction being contrary to Kahneman and Tversky's (1979) Prospect Theory. The Renewable Resources Model was tested under conditions that, theoretically, should enhance the dual separation outcomes. However, in seven of the eight choice scenarios, complete reversals of these outcomes were observed B that is, the participants in the experiments preferred to combine multiple gains and to combine multiple losses. Explanations of these unexpected results were sought in differences in rating procedures and task presentation between the original study and the present study. The conclusion is that the Renewable Resources Model is not robust.