Parametric weighting functions

Journal of Economic Theory

Volumn 144, Issue 3, 2009, Pages 1102-1118

  Diecidue, Enrico ^a   Schmidt, Ulrich ^b,c   Zank, Horst ^d  

^a INSEAD   (France)

^b UNIVERSITY OF KIEL   (Germany)

^c KIEL INSTITUTE FOR THE WORLD ECONOMY   (Germany)

^d UNIVERSITY OF MANCHESTER   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

Comonotonic independence; Preference foundation; Probability weighting function; Rank dependent utility

Indexed keywords

EID: 64049110269     PISSN: 00220531     EISSN: 10957235     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.jet.2008.10.004     Document Type: Article

References (57)

1. Abdellaoui M. Parameter-free elicitation of utility and probability weighting functions. Manage. Sci. 46 (2000) 1497-1512
2. Abdellaoui M. A genuine rank-dependent generalization of the von Neumann-Morgenstern expected utility theorem. Econometrica 70 (2002) 717-736
3. Abdellaoui M., Vossmann F., and Weber M. Choice-based elicitation and decomposition of decision weights for gains and losses under uncertainty. Manage. Sci. 51 (2005) 1384-1399
4. Aczél J., and Luce D.R. A behavioral condition for Prelec's weighting function on the positive line without assuming W (1) = 1. J. Math. Psych. 51 (2007) 126-129
5. Allais M. Le comportement de l'homme rationnel devant le risque : critique des postulats et axiomes de l'ecole américaine. Econometrica 21 (1953) 503-546
6. al-Nowaihi A., and Dhami S. A simple derivation of Prelec's probability weighting function. J. Math. Psych. 50 (2006) 521-524
7. Bell D.E. Disappointment in decision making under uncertainty. Operations Res. 33 (1985) 1-27
8. Birnbaum M.H. Causes of Allais common consequence paradoxes: An experimental dissection. J. Math. Psych. 48 (2004) 87-106
9. Birnbaum M.H., and Navarrete J.B. Testing descriptive utility theories: Violations of stochastic dominance and cumulative independence. J. Risk Uncertainty 17 (1998) 49-78
10. Bleichrodt H., and Pinto J.L. A parameter-free elicitation of the probability weighting function in medical decision analysis. Manage. Sci. 46 (2000) 1485-1496
11. Camerer C.F., and Ho T.-H. Violations of the betweenness axiom and nonlinearity in probability. J. Risk Uncertainty 8 (1994) 167-196
12. Chateauneuf A., and Cohen M. Risk seeking with diminishing marginal utility in a non-expected utility model. J. Risk Uncertainty 9 (1994) 77-91
13. Chateauneuf A., Cohen M., and Meilijson I. Four notions of mean-preserving increase in risk, risk attitudes and applications to the rank-dependent expected utility model. J. Math. Econ. 40 (2004) 547-571
14. Chateauneuf A., and Wakker P.P. From local to global additive representation. J. Math. Econ. 22 (1993) 523-545
15. Chew S.H., Karni E., and Safra Z. Risk aversion in the theory of expected utility with rank dependent probabilities. J. Econ. Theory 42 (1987) 370-381
16. Chew S.H., and Waller W.S. Empirical tests of weighted utility theory. J. Math. Psych. 30 (1986) 55-72
17. Currim I.S., and Sarin R.K. Prospect versus utility. Manage. Sci. 35 (1989) 22-41
18. Debreu G. Representation of a preference ordering by a numerical function. In: Thrall R.M., Coombs C.H., and Davis R.L. (Eds). Decision Processes (1954), Wiley, New York 159-165
19. Debreu G. Topological methods in cardinal utility theory. In: Arrow K.J., Karlin S., and Suppes P. (Eds). Mathematical Methods in the Social Sciences (1960), Stanford Univ. Press, Stanford, CA 16-26
20. Etchart-Vincent N. Is probability weighting sensitive to the magnitude of consequences? An experimental investigation on losses. J. Risk Uncertainty 28 (2004) 217-235
21. Ghirardato P., and Marinacci M. Risk, ambiguity, and the separation of utility and beliefs. Math. Operations Res. 26 (2001) 864-890
22. Goldstein W.M., and Einhorn H.J. Expression theory and the preference reversal phenomena. Psychological Rev. 94 (1987) 236-254
23. Gonzalez R., and Wu G. On the shape of the probability weighting function. Cognitive Psych. 38 (1999) 129-166
24. Hey J.D., and Orme C. Investigating generalizations of expected utility theory using experimental data. Econometrica 62 (1994) 1291-1326
25. Karmarkar U.S. Subjectively weighted utility: A descriptive extension of the expected utility model. Organ. Behav. Human Performance 21 (1978) 61-72
26. Karmarkar U.S. Subjectively weighted utility and the Allais Paradox. Organ. Behav. Human Performance 24 (1979) 67-72
27. Kilka M., and Weber M. What determines the shape of the probability weighting function under uncertainty?. Manage. Sci. 47 (2001) 1712-1726
28. Lattimore P.M., Baker J.R., and Witte A.D. The influence of probability on risky choice. J. Econ. Behav. Organ. 17 (1992) 377-400
29. Luce D.R. Utility of Gains and Losses: Measurement-Theoretical and Experimental Approaches (2000), Lawrence Erlbaum Publishers, London
30. Luce D.R. Reduction invariance and Prelec's weighting functions. J. Math. Psych. 45 (2001) 167-179
31. Luce D.R., and Fishburn P.C. Rank- and sign-dependent linear utility models for finite first-order gambles. J. Risk Uncertainty 4 (1991) 29-59
32. Luce D.R., Mellers B.A., and Chang S.-J. Is choice the correct primitive? On using certainty equivalents and reference levels to predict choices among gambles. J. Risk Uncertainty 6 (1993) 115-143
33. MacCrimmon K.R., and Larsson S. Utility theory: Axioms versus "paradoxes". In: Allais M., and Hagen O. (Eds). Expected Utility Hypotheses and the Allais Paradox (1979), Reidel, Dordrecht, The Netherlands 333-409
34. Machina M.J. Dynamic consistency and non-expected utility models of choice under uncertainty. J. Econ. Lit. 27 (1989) 1622-1688
35. Marley A.A.J., and Luce D.R. Independence properties vis-à-vis several utility representations. Theory Dec. 58 (2005) 77-143
36. Nakamura Y. Rank dependent utility for arbitrary consequence spaces. Math. Soc. Sci. 29 (1995) 103-129
37. Narens L. A theory of ratio magnitude estimation. J. Math. Psych. 40 (1996) 109-129
38. Prelec D. The probability weighting function. Econometrica 66 (1998) 497-527
39. Quiggin J. Risk perception and risk aversion among Australian farmers. Australian J. Agr. Econ. 25 (1981) 160-169
40. Quiggin J. A theory of anticipated utility. J. Econ. Behav. Organ. 3 (1982) 323-343
41. Röell A. Risk aversion in Quiggin and Yaari's rank-order model of choice under uncertainty. Econ. J. 97 Suppl. (1987) 143-160
42. Safra Z., and Segal U. Constant risk aversion. J. Econ. Theory 83 (1998) 19-42
43. Stott H.P. Choosing from cumulative prospect theory's functional menagerie. J. Risk Uncertainty 32 (2006) 101-130
44. Tversky A., and Fox C.R. Weighing risk and uncertainty. Psychological Rev. 102 (1995) 269-283
45. Tversky A., and Kahneman D. Advances in prospect theory: Cumulative representation of uncertainty. J. Risk Uncertainty 5 (1992) 297-323
46. Tversky A., and Wakker P.P. Risk attitudes and decision weights. Econometrica 63 (1995) 1255-1280
47. von Neumann J., and Morgenstern O. Theory of Games and Economic Behavior (1944), Princeton Univ. Press, Princeton, NJ 1947, 1953
48. Wakker P.P. Additive representations on rank-ordered sets, II. The topological approach. J. Math. Econ. 22 (1993) 1-26
49. Wakker P.P. Separating marginal utility and probabilistic risk aversion. Theory Dec. 36 (1994) 1-44
50. Wakker P.P. Testing and characterizing properties of nonadditive measures through violations of the sure-thing principle. Econometrica 69 (2001) 1039-1059
51. Wakker P.P., Erev I., and Weber E.U. Comonotonic independence: The critical test between classical and rank-dependent utility theories. J. Risk Uncertainty 9 (1994) 195-230
52. Wakker P.P., and Zank H. A simple preference-foundation of cumulative prospect theory with power utility. Europ. Econ. Rev. 46 (2002) 1253-1271
53. Wu G. An empirical test of ordinal independence. J. Risk Uncertainty 9 (1994) 39-60
54. Wu G., and Gonzalez R. Curvature of the probability weighting function. Manage. Sci. 42 (1996) 1676-1690
55. Yaari M.E. The dual theory of choice under risk. Econometrica 55 (1987) 95-115
56. Zank H. Cumulative prospect theory for parametric and multiattribute utilities. Math. Operations Res. 26 (2001) 67-81
57. H. Zank, Deriving rank-dependent utility through probabilistic consistency, Economics Working Paper 0409 (2004), University of Manchester