Testing the 'standard' model of stochastic choice under risk

Journal of Risk and Uncertainty

Volumn 45, Issue 3, 2012, Pages 191-213

  Butler, David ^a   Isoni, Andrea ^b,c   Loomes, Graham ^b  

^a MURDOCH UNIVERSITY   (Australia)

^b UNIVERSITY OF WARWICK   (United Kingdom)

^c UNIVERSITY OF WARWICK   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

Choice under risk; Fechner model; Random preference; Stochastic choice

Indexed keywords

EID: 84871428208     PISSN: 08955646     EISSN: 15730476     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/s11166-012-9154-4     Document Type: Article

References (31)

1. Becker, G. M., DeGroot, M. H., & Marschak, J. (1963). Stochastic models of choice behaviour. Behavioral Science, 8, 41-55.
2. Blavatskyy, P. R. (2006). Violations of betweenness or random errors? Economics Letters, 91, 34-38.
3. Blavatskyy, P. R. (2009). Preference reversals and probabilistic decisions. Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, 39, 237-250.
4. Blavatskyy, P. R. (2011). A model of probabilistic choice satisfying first-order stochastic dominance. Management Science, 57, 542-548.
5. Blavatskyy, P. R., & Pogrebna, G. (2010). Models of stochastic choice and decision theories: Why both are important for analyzing decisions. Journal of Applied Econometrics, 25, 963-986.
6. Bruhin, A., Fehr-Duda, H., & Epper, T. (2010). Risk and rationality: Uncovering heterogeneity in probability distortion. Econometrica, 78, 1375-1412.
7. Butler, D., & Loomes, G. (2007). Imprecision as an account of the preference reversal phenomenon. American Economic Review, 92, 277-298.
8. Butler, D., Isoni, A., Loomes, G., & Tsutsui, K. (2012a). Looking beyond choices: Investigating the sensitivity and validity of strength of preference measures. Working paper.
9. Butler, D., Isoni, A., & Loomes, G. (2012b). What lies beneath? systematic intransitive tendencies revealed by strength of preference measures. Working paper.
10. Camerer, C. F. (1995). Individual decision-making. In J. Kagel & A. Roth (Eds.), The handbook of experimental economics. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
11. Epper, T., Fehr-Duda, H., & Bruhin, A. (2011). Viewing the future through a warped lens: Why uncertainty generates hyperbolic discounting. Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, 43, 169-203.
12. Fechner, G. T. (1860, 1966). Elements of psychophysics. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston.
13. Harless, D. W., & Camerer, C. F. (1994). The predictive utility of generalized expected utility theories. Econometrica, 62, 1251-1289.
14. Harrison, G. W., List, J. A., & Towe, C. A. (2007). Naturally occurring preferences and exogenous laboratory experiments: A case study of risk aversion. Econometrica, 75, 433-458.
15. Hey, J. D., & Orme, C. (1994). Investigating generalizations of expected utility theory using experimental data. Econometrica, 62, 1291-1326.
16. Hey, J. D., Lotito, G., & Maffioletti, A. (2010). The descriptive and predictive adequacy of theories of decision making under uncertainty/ambiguity. Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, 41, 81-111.
17. Lichtenstein, S., & Slovic, P. (1971). Reversals of preference between bids and choices in gambling decisions. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 89, 46-55.
18. Loomes, G. (2005). Modelling the stochastic component of behaviour in experiments: Some issues for the interpretation of data. Experimental Economics, 8, 301-323.
19. Loomes, G., & Sugden, R. (1995). Incorporating a stochastic element into decision theories. European Economic Review, 39, 641-648.
20. Loomes, G., & Sugden, R. (1998). Testing different stochastic specifications of risky choice. Economica, 65, 581-598.
21. Loomes, G., Moffatt, P. G., & Sugden, R. (2002). A microeconometric test of alternative theories of risky choice. Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, 24, 103-130.
22. Luce, R. D. (1959). Individual choice behavior: A theoretical analysis. New York: John Wiley.
23. Luce, R. D., & Suppes, P. (1965). Preferences, utility, and subjective probability. In R. D. Luce et al. (Eds.), Handbook of mathematical psychology, 3. New York: John Wiley.
24. Mosteller, F., & Nogee, P. (1951). An experimental measurement of utility. Journal of Political Economy, 59, 371-404.
25. Pratt, J. W. (1964). Risk aversion in the small and in the large. Econometrica, 32, 122-136.
26. Seidl, C. (2002). Preference reversal. Journal of Economic Surveys, 16, 621-655.
27. Starmer, C. (2000). Developments in non-expected utility theory: The hunt for a descriptive theory of choice under risk. Journal of Economic Literature, 38, 332-382.
28. von Gaudecker, H., van Soest, A., & Wengström, E. (2011). Heterogeneity in risky choice behavior in a broad population. American Economic Review, 101, 664-694.
29. von Neumann, J., & Morgenstern, O. (1947). Theory of games and economic behavior. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
30. Wilcox, N. T. (2008). Stochastic models for discrete choice under risk: A critical primer and econometric comparison. In J. C. Cox & G. W. Harrison (Eds.), Research in experimental economics, 12. Bingley: Emerald Group Publishing Limited.
31. Wilcox, N. T. (2011). 'Stochastically more risk averse': A contextual theory of stochastic discrete choice under risk. Journal of Econometrics, 162, 89-104.