Game theoretic models have found widespread use in the analysis and design of radio resource management algorithms for a wide variety of systems such as cellular, ad hoc and sensor networks. The fundamental principle behind such models and much of game theory has been the reliance on expected utility theory (EUT). In this paper, we consider a simple wireless random access game where instead of following the precepts of EUT, the players follow the precepts of Prospect Theory (PT), a theory developed by Kahneman and Tversky to explain real-life decision making that often deviates from the behavior expected under EUT. Specifically, we consider a game where selfish players adjust their transmission probabilities over a collision channel according to rewards received for successful transmission while incurring energy and delay costs. We compare and contrast the Nash equilibria achieved under both EUT and PT and highlight the differences in them.