Abstract We construct and run an experiment to test the most basic choice effect predicted by salience theory. Subjects allocate wealth between a risky and a safe investment. While we vary an apparent payoff ratio to influence salience, treatments have economically equivalent consequences. Most other theories of behavior then predict zero effect. Our experimental findings are strongly consistent with the behavioral implication of a continuous version of salience theory. We provide a novel structural estimate on the strength of salience. In our setting, increasing the relative payoff contrast by 1% is equivalent to an increased odds ratio by about 0.4%.