A genuine foundation for prospect theory

Journal of Risk and Uncertainty

Volumn 45, Issue 2, 2012, Pages 97-113

  Schmidt, Ulrich ^a,b   Zank, Horst ^c  

^a UNIVERSITY OF KIEL   (Germany)

^b KIEL INSTITUTE FOR THE WORLD ECONOMY   (Germany)

^c UNIVERSITY OF MANCHESTER   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

Diminishing sensitivity; Prospect theory; Reference dependence; Reference point; Utility

Indexed keywords

EID: 84867097667     PISSN: 08955646     EISSN: 15730476     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/s11166-012-9150-8     Document Type: Article

References (79)

1. Abdellaoui, M. (2000). Parameter-free elicitation of utility and probability weighting functions. Management Science, 46, 1497-1512.
2. Abdellaoui, M. (2002). A genuine rank-dependent generalization of the von Neumann-Morgenstern expected utility theorem. Econometrica, 70, 717-736.
3. Abdellaoui, M., Bleichrodt H., l'Haridon O. (2008). A tractable method to measure utility and loss aversion under prospect theory. Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, 36, 245-266.
4. Abdellaoui, M., Bleichrodt, H., Paraschiv, C. (2007). Measuring loss aversion under prospect theory: a parameter-free approach. Management Science, 53, 1659-1674.
5. Abdellaoui, M., l'Haridon, O., Zank, H. (2010). Separating curvature and elevation: a parametric probability weighting function. Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, 41, 39-65.
6. Abdellaoui, M., Vossmann, F., Weber, M. (2005). Choice-based elicitation and decomposition of decision weights for gains and losses under uncertainty. Management Science, 51, 1384-1399.
7. Abdellaoui, M., & Wakker, P. P. (2005). The likelihood method for decision under uncertainty. Theory and Decision, 58, 3-76.
8. Abeler, J., Falk, A., Goette, L., Huffman, D. (2011). Reference points and effort provision. American Economic Review, 101, 470-492.
9. Baillon, A., Driesen, B., Wakker, P. P. (2012). Relative concave utility for risk and ambiguity. Games and Economic Behavior, 75, 481-489.
10. Bateman, I. J., Munro, A., Rhodes, B., Starmer, C., Sugden, R. (1997). A test of the theory of reference-dependent preferences. Quarterly Journal of Economics, 112, 647-661.
11. Battalio, R. C., Kagel, J. H., Jiranyakul, K. (1990). Testing between alternative models of choice under uncertainty: some initial results. Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, 3, 25-50.
12. Bell, D. E. (1982). Regret in decision making under uncertainty. Operations Research, 30, 961-981.
13. Bleichrodt, H., Pinto, J. L., Wakker, P. P. (2001). Making descriptive use of prospect theory to improve the prescriptive use of expected utility. Management Science, 47, 1498-1514.
14. Brooks, P., & Zank, H. (2005). Loss averse behavior. Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, 31, 301-325.
15. Budescu, D. V., & Weiss, W. (1987). Reflection of transitive and intransitive preferences: a test of prospect theory. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 39, 184-202.
16. Camerer, C. F. (1989). An experimental test of several generalized utility theories. Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, 2, 61-104.
17. Camerer, C. F. (1998). Bounded rationality in individual decision making. Experimental Economics, 1, 163-183.
18. Camerer, C. F., Loewenstein, G., Rabin, M. (2004). Advances in behavioral economics. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
19. Chateauneuf, A. (1999). Comonotonicity axioms and rank-dependent expected utility for arbitrary consequences. Journal of Mathematical Economics, 32, 21-45.
20. Chateauneuf, A., & Wakker, P. P. (1999). An axiomatization of cumulative prospect theory for decision under risk. Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, 18, 137-145.
21. Chew, S. H., & Sagi, J. S. (2006). Event exchangeability: probabilistic sophistication without continuity or monotonicity. Econometrica, 74, 771-786.
22. Currim, I. S., & Sarin, R. K. (1989). Prospect versus utility. Management Science, 35, 22-41.
23. de Martino, B., Kumaran, D., Seymour, B., Dolan, R. J. (2006). Frames, biases, and rational decision-making in the human brain. Science, 313, 684-687.
24. Dickhaut, J. W., McCabe, K., Nagode, J. N., Rustichini, A., Smith, K., Pardo, J. V. (2003). The impact of the certainty context on the process of choice. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 100, 3536-3541.
25. Edwards, W. (1953). Probability-preferences in gambling. American Journal of Psychology, 66, 349-364.
26. Edwards, W. (1954). Probability-preferences among bets with differing expected values. American Journal of Psychology, 67, 56-67.
27. Etchart-Vincent, N. (2004). Is probability weighting sensitive to the magnitude of consequences? An experimental investigation on losses. Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, 28, 217-235.
28. Farber, H. S. (2008). Reference-dependent preferences and labor supply: The case of new york city taxi drivers. American Economic Review, 98, 1069-1082.
29. Fennema, H., & van Assen, M. (1999). Measuring the utility for losses by means of the tradeoff method. Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, 17, 277-295.
30. Fudenberg, D. (2006). Advancing beyond Advances in behavioral economics. Journal of Economic Literature, 44, 694-711.
31. Gilboa, I. (1987). Expected utility with purely subjective non-additive probabilities. Journal of Mathematical Economics, 16, 65-88.
32. Gul, F. (1991). A theory of disappointment aversion. Econometrica, 59, 667-686.
33. Hershey, J. C., & Schoemaker, P. J. H. (1985). Probability versus certainty equivalence methods in utility measurement: are they equivalent? Management Science, 31, 1213-1231.
34. Hogarth, R. M., & Einhorn, H. J. (1990). Venture theory: a model of decision weights. Management Science, 36, 780-803.
35. Johnson, H. J. (1994). Prospect theory in the commercial banking industry. Journal of Financial and Strategic Decisions, 7, 73-89.
36. Kahneman, D., Knetsch, J. L., Thaler, R. H. (1990). Experimental tests of the endowment effect and the Coase theorem. Journal of Political Economy, 98, 1325-1348.
37. Kahneman, D., & Tversky, A. (1979). Prospect theory: an analysis of decision under risk. Econometrica, 47, 263-291.
38. Kahneman, D., & Tversky, A. (2000). Choices, values, and frames. New York: Cambridge University Press.
39. Köbberling, V., & Wakker, P. P. (2003). Preference foundations for nonexpected utility: a generalized and simplified technique. Mathematics of Operations Research, 28, 395-423.
40. Köszegi, B., & Rabin, M. (2006). A model of reference-dependent preferences. Quarterly Journal of Economics, 121, 1133-1165.
41. Köszegi, B., & Rabin, M. (2007). Reference-dependent risk attitudes. American Economic Review, 97, 1047-1073.
42. Köszegi, B. (2010). Utility from anticipation and personal equilibrium. Economic Theory, 44, 415-444.
43. Kothiyal, A., Spinu, V., Wakker, P. P. (2011). Prospect theory for continuous distributions: a preference foundation. Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, 42, 195-210.
44. Loewenstein, G. F., & Adler, D. (1995). A bias in the prediction of tastes. Economic Journal, 105, 929-937.
45. Loomes, G., & Sugden, R. (1982). Regret theory: an alternative theory of rational choice under uncertainty. Economic Journal, 92, 805-824.
46. Luce, R. D. (1991). Rank-and-sign dependent linear utility models for binary gambles. Journal of Economic Theory, 53, 75-100.
47. Luce, R. D. (2000). Utility of gains and losses: Measurement-theoretical and experimental approaches. New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
48. Luce, R. D., & Fishburn, P. C. (1991). Rank- and sign-dependent linear utility models for finite first-order gambles. Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, 4, 29-59.
49. Machina, M. J., & Schmeidler, D. (1992). A more robust definition of subjective probability. Econometrica, 60, 745-780.
50. Payne, J. W. (2005). It is whether you win or lose: the importance of the overall probabilities of winning or losing in risky choice. Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, 30, 5-19.
51. Pennings, J. M. E., & Smidts, A. (2003). The shape of utility functions and organizational behavior. Management Science, 49, 1251-1263.
52. Pesendorfer, W. (2006). Behavioral economics comes of age. Journal of Economic Literature, 44, 712-721.
53. Peters, H. J. M. (2012). A preference foundation for constant loss aversion. Journal of Mathematical Economics, 48, 21-25.
54. Samuelson, W. F., & Zeckhauser, R. J. (1988). Status quo bias in decision making. Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, 1, 7-59.
55. Savage, L. J. (1954). The foundations of statistics. New York: Wiley.
56. Schmeidler, D. (1989). Subjective probability and expected utility without additivity. Econometrica, 57, 571-587.
57. Schmidt, U. (2003). Reference-dependence in cumulative prospect theory. Journal of Mathematical Psychology, 47, 122-131.
58. Schmidt, U., Starmer, C., Sugden, R. (2008). Third-generation prospect theory. Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, 36, 203-223.
59. Schmidt, U., & Traub, S. (2002). An experimental test of loss aversion. Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, 25, 233-249.
60. Schmidt, U., & Zank, H. (2005). What is loss aversion? Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, 30, 157-167.
61. Schmidt, U., & Zank, H. (2008). Risk aversion in cumulative prospect theory. Management Science, 54, 208-216.
62. Schmidt, U., & Zank, H. (2009). A simple model of cumulative prospect theory. Journal of Mathematical Economics, 45, 308-319.
63. Shalev, J. (2000). Loss aversion equilibrium. International Journal of Game Theory, 29, 269-287.
64. Shalev, J. (2002). Loss aversion and bargaining. Theory and Decision, 52, 201-232.
65. Sugden, R. (2003). Reference-dependent subjective expected utility. Journal of Economic Theory, 111, 172-191.
66. Thaler, R. H. (1980). Toward a positive theory of consumer choice. Journal of Economic Behavior and Organization, 1, 39-60.
67. Tversky, A., & Kahneman, D. (1991). Loss aversion in riskless choice: a reference-dependent model. Quarterly Journal of Economics, 56, 1039-1061.
68. Tversky, A., & Kahneman, D. (1992). Advances in prospect theory: cumulative representation of uncertainty. Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, 5, 297-323.
69. van Osch, S. M. C., van den Hout, W. B., Stiggelbout, A. M. (2006). Exploring the reference point in prospect theory: gambles for length of life. Medical Decision Making, 26, 338-346.
70. Viscusi, W. K., & Huber, J. C. (2012). Reference-dependent valuations of risk: why willingness-to-accept exceeds willingness-to-pay. Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, 44, 19-44.
71. Viscusi, W. K., Magat, W. A., Huber, J. C. (1987). An investigation of the rationality of consumer valuations of multiple health risks. The Rand Journal of Economics, 18, 465-479.
72. Wakker, P. P. (1993). Unbounded utility for Savage's "Foundation of statistics", and other models. Mathematics of Operations Research, 18, 446-485.
73. Wakker, P. P. (2010). Prospect theory: For risk and ambiguity. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
74. Wakker, P. P., & Deneffe, D. (1996). Eliciting von Neumann-Morgenstern utilities when probabilities are distorted or unknown. Management Science, 42, 1131-1150.
75. Wakker, P. P., & Tversky, A. (1993). An axiomatization of cumulative prospect theory. Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, 7, 147-176.
76. Wakker, P. P., & Zank, H. (2002). A simple preference-foundation of cumulative prospect theory with power utility. European Economic Review, 46, 1253-1271.
77. Werner, K. M., & Zank, H. (2012). Foundations for prospect theory through probability midpoint consistency. Economics Discussion Paper 1210, University of Manchester.
78. Zank, H. (2001). Cumulative prospect theory for parametric and multiattribute Utilities. Mathematics of Operations Research, 26, 67-81.
79. Zank, H. (2010). Consistent probability attitudes. Economic Theory, 44, 167-185.