Probability and risk: Foundations and economic implications of probability-dependent risk preferences

Annual Review of Economics

Volumn 4, Issue , 2012, Pages 567-593

  Fehr Duda, Helga ^a   Epper, Thomas ^a,b  

^a ETH ZURICH   (Switzerland)

^b UNIVERSITY OF ZURICH   (Switzerland)

Author keywords

cumulative prospect theory; disappointment aversion; probability weighting; rank dependent utility; risk preferences

Indexed keywords

EID: 84873126182     PISSN: 19411383     EISSN: 19411391     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1146/annurev-economics-080511-110950     Document Type: Article

References (101)

1. Abdellaoui M. 2000. Parameter-free elicitation of utility and probability weighting functions. Manag. Sci. 46: 1497-512
2. Abdellaoui M, Diecidue E,Ö ncü ler A. 2011. Risk preferences at different time periods: an experimental investigation. Manag. Sci. 57: 975-87
3. Allais M. 1953. L'extension des theories de l'equilibre economique general et du rendement social au cas du risque. Econometrica 21: 269-90
4. Andrikogiannopoulou A. 2010. Estimating risk preferences from a large panel of real-world betting choices. Unpublished manuscript, Princeton Univ.
5. Ang A, Hodrick R, Xing Y, Zhang X. 2006. The cross-section of volatility and expected returns. J. Finance 61: 259-99
6. Backus D, Routledge B, Zin S. 2005. Exotic preferences for macroeconomists. In NBER Macroeconomics Annual 2004, ed. M Gertler, K Rogoff, pp. 319-414. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press
7. Barberis N, Huang M. 2008. Stocks as lotteries: the implications of probability weighting for security prices. Am. Econ. Rev. 98: 2066-100
8. Barberis N, Huang M, Santos T. 2001. Prospect theory and asset prices. Q. J. Econ. 116: 1-53
9. Barberis N, Huang M, Thaler RH. 2006. Individual preferences, monetary gambles, and stock market participation: a case for narrow framing. Am. Econ. Rev. 96: 1069-90
10. Barseghyan L, Molinari F, O'Donoghue T, Teitelbaum JC. 2010. The nature of risk preferences: evidence from insurance choices. Unpublished manuscript, Cornell Univ.
11. Battalio R, Kagel J, Jiranyakul K. 1990. Testing between alternative models of choice under uncertainty: some initial results. J. Risk Uncertain. 3: 25-50
12. Battalio R, Kagel J, MacDonald D. 1985. Animals' choices over uncertain outcomes: some initial experimental results. Am. Econ. Rev. 75: 597-613
13. Bellemare C, Krause M, Krö ger S, Zhang C. 2005. Myopic loss aversion: information feedback vs. investment flexibility. Econ. Lett. 87: 319-24
14. Benartzi S, Thaler R. 1995.Myopic loss aversion and the equity premium puzzle. Q. J. Econ. 110: 73-92
15. Booij A, van Praag B, van de Kuilen G. 2010. A parametric analysis of prospect theory's functionals for the general population. Theory Decis. 68: 115-48
16. Boyer B, Mitton T, Vorkink K. 2010. Expected idiosyncratic skewness. Rev. Financ. Stud. 23: 169-202
17. Bruhin A, Fehr-Duda H, Epper T. 2010. Risk and rationality: uncovering heterogeneity in probability distortion. Econometrica 78: 1375-412
18. Camerer C. 1992. Recent tests of generalizations of expected utility theory. In Utility Theories: Measurements and Applications, ed. W Edwards, pp. 207-51. Norwell, MA: Kluwer
19. Camerer C. 2000. Prospect theory in the wild: evidence from the field. In Choices, Values, and Frames, ed. D Kahneman, A Tversky, pp. 288-300. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge Univ. Press
20. Camerer C. 2004. Individual decision making. In Handbook of Experimental Economics, ed. J Kagel, A Roth, pp. 587-703. Princeton, NJ: Princeton Univ. Press
21. Camerer C, Ho T-H. 1994. Violations of the betweenness axiom and nonlinearity in probability. J. Risk Uncertain. 8: 167-96
22. Chapman D, Polkovnichenko V. 2009. First-order risk aversion, heterogeneity, and asset market outcomes. J. Finance 64: 1863-87
23. Chew S. 1989. Axiomatic utility theories with the betweenness property. Ann. Oper. Res. 19: 273-98
24. Cicchetti C, Dubin J. 1994. A microeconometric analysis of risk aversion and the decision to selfinsure. J. Polit. Econ. 102: 169-86
25. Conlisk J. 1989. Three variants on the Allais example. Am. Econ. Rev. 79: 392-407
26. Cook PJ, Clotfelter CT. 1993. The peculiar scale economies of Lotto. Am. Econ. Rev. 83: 634-43
27. Crawford VP. 1990. Equilibrium without independence. J. Econ. Theory 50: 127-54
28. Croson R, Gneezy U. 2009. Gender differences in preferences. J. Econ. Lit. 47: 448-74
29. De Giorgi E, Legg S. 2012. Dynamic portfolio choice and asset pricing with narrow framing and probability weighting. J. Econ. Dyn. Control 36: 951-72
30. De Giorgi E, Post T. 2011. Loss aversion with a state-dependent reference point. Res. Pap. 07-14, Swiss Finance Inst., Zü rich
31. Dekel E. 1986. An axiomatic characterization of preferences under uncertainty: weakening the independence axiom. J. Econ. Theory 40: 304-18
32. Diecidue E, Wakker P. 2001. On the intuition of rank-dependent utility. J. Risk Uncertain. 23: 281-98
33. Epper T, Fehr-Duda H, Bruhin A. 2011a. Viewing the future through a warped lens: why uncertainty generates hyperbolic discounting. J. Risk Uncertain. 43(3): 169-203
34. Epper T, Fehr-Duda H, Schubert R. 2011b. Energy-using durables: the role of time discounting in investment decisions. Publ. 290417, Swiss Fed. Off. Energy, Bern
35. Epstein L, Zin S. 2001. The independence axiom and asset returns. J. Empir. Finance 8: 537-72
36. Fehr-Duda H, Bruhin A, Epper T. 2010. Rationality on the rise: why relative risk aversion increases with stake size. J. Risk Uncertain. 40: 147-80
37. Fehr-Duda H, de Gennaro M, Schubert R. 2006. Gender, financial risk, and probability weights. Theory Decis. 60: 283-313
38. Fehr-Duda H, Epper T. 2011. The missing link: a unifying theory of behavior under risk and over time. Unpublished manuscript, ETH Zü rich
39. Fox CR, Rogers BA, Tversky A. 1996. Options traders exhibit subadditive decision weights. J. Risk Uncertain. 13: 5-17
40. Friedman M, Savage L. 1948. The utility analysis of choices involving risk. J. Polit. Econ. 56: 279-304
41. Gneezy U, Potters J. 1997. An experiment on risk taking and evaluation periods. Q. J. Econ. 112: 631-45
42. GoldsteinW, Einhorn H. 1987. Expression theory and the preference reversal phenomena. Psychol. Rev. 94: 236-54
43. Gonzalez R, Wu G. 1999. On the shape of the probability weighting function. Cognit. Psychol. 38: 129-66
44. Green T, Hwang B-H. 2012. Initial public offerings as lotteries: expected skewness and first-day returns. Manag. Sci. 58: 432-44
45. Grgeta E. 2003. Estimating risk aversion. Unpublished manuscript, Univ. Chicago
46. Gul F. 1991. A theory of disappointment aversion. Econometrica 59: 667-86
47. Gul F, Pesendorfer W. 2006. The revealed preference implications of reference dependent preferences. Unpublished manuscript, Princeton Univ.
48. Hagen O. 1979. Towards a positive theory of preference under risk. In Expected Utility and the Allais Paradox, ed. M Allais, O Hagen, pp. 271-302. Dordrecht: D. Reidel
49. Haigh M, List J. 2005. Do professional traders exhibit myopic loss aversion? An experimental analysis. J. Finance 60: 523-34
50. Halevy Y. 2008. Strotz meets Allais: diminishing impatience and certainty effect. Am. Econ. Rev. 98: 1145-62
51. Harbaugh WT, Krause K, Vesterlund L. 2010. The fourfold pattern of risk attitudes in choice and pricing tasks. Econ. J. 120: 595-611
52. Harless D, Camerer C. 1994. The predictive utility of generalized expected utility theories. Econometrica 62: 1251-89
53. Hey JD, Orme C. 1994. Investigating generalizations of expected utility theory using experimental data. Econometrica 62: 1291-326
54. Holt C, Laury S. 2005. Risk aversion and incentive effects: new data without order effects. Am. Econ. Rev. 95: 902-4
55. Ingersoll JE. 2008. Non-monotonicity of the Tversky-Kahneman probability-weighting function: a cautionary note. Eur. Financ. Manag. 14: 385-90
56. Jullien B, Salanié B. 2000. Estimating preferences under risk: the case of racetrack bettors. J. Polit. Econ. 108: 503-30
57. Kachelmeier S, Shehata M. 1992. Examining risk preferences under high monetary incentives: experimental evidence from the People's Republic of China. Am. Econ. Rev. 82: 1120-41
58. Kagel J, MacDonald D, Battalio R. 1990. Tests of "fanning out" of indifference curves: results from animal and human experiments. Am. Econ. Rev. 80: 912-21
59. Kahneman D, Tversky A. 1979. Prospect theory: an analysis of decision under risk. Econometrica 47: 263-92
60. Karmarkar US. 1979. Subjectively weighted utility and the Allais paradox. Organ. Behav. Hum. Perform. 24: 67-72
61. Kliger D, Levy O. 2009. Theories of choice under risk: insights from financial markets. J. Econ. Behav. Organ. 71: 330-46
62. Kö bberling V, Wakker P. 2005. An index of loss aversion. J. Econ. Theory 112: 119-31
63. Köszegi B, Rabin M. 2007. Reference-dependent risk attitudes. Am. Econ. Rev. 97: 1047-73
64. Kumar A. 2009. Who gambles in the stock market? J. Finance 64: 1889-933
65. List J, Haigh M. 2005. A simple test of expected utility theory using professional traders. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 102: 945-48
66. Loomes G, Segal U. 1994. Observing different orders of risk aversion. J. Risk Uncertain. 9: 239-56
67. Loomes G, Sugden R. 1986. Disappointment and dynamic consistency in choice under uncertainty. Rev. Econ. Stud. 53: 271-82
68. MacCrimmon K. 1968. Descriptive and normative implications of the decision theory postulates. In Risk and Uncertainty, ed. K Borch, J Mossin, pp. 3-32. London: MacMillan
69. MacCrimmon K, Larsson S. 1979. Utility theory: axioms versus paradoxes. In Expected Utility and the Allais Paradox, ed. M Allais, O Hagen, pp. 333-409. Dordrecht: D. Reidel
70. Machina M. 1984. Temporal risk and the nature of induced preferences. J. Econ. Theory 33: 199-231
71. Machina M. 1987. Choice under uncertainty: problems solved and unsolved. J. Econ. Perspect. 1(1): 121-54
72. Machina MJ. 2001. Payoff kinks in preferences over lotteries. J. Risk Uncertain. 23: 207-60
73. Mehra R. 2006. The equity premium puzzle: a review. Found. Trends Finance 2(1): 1-81
74. Mitton T, Vorkink K. 2007. Equilibrium underdiversification and the preference for skewness. Rev. Financ. Stud. 20: 1255-88
75. Polkovnichenko V. 2005. Household portfolio diversification: a case for rank-dependent preferences. Rev. Financ. Stud. 18: 1467-502
76. Polkovnichenko V, Zhao F. 2009. Probability weighting functions implied by options prices. Unpublished manuscript, Univ. Texas, Dallas
77. Pratt JW. 1964. Risk aversion in the small and in the large. Econometrica 32: 122-36
78. Prelec D. 1998. The probability weighting function. Econometrica 66: 497-527
79. Prelec D. 2000. Compound invariant weighting functions in prospect theory. In Choices, Values, and Frames, ed. D Kahneman, A Tversky, pp. 67-92. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge Univ. Press
80. Quiggin J. 1982. A theory of anticipated utility. J. Econ. Behav. Organ. 3: 323-43
81. Rabin M, Thaler R. 2001. Anomalies: risk aversion. J. Econ. Perspect. 15(1): 219-32
82. Rachlin H, Raineri A, Cross D. 1991. Subjective probability and delay. J. Exp. Anal. Behav. 55: 233-44
83. Routledge B, Zin S. 2010. Generalized disappointment aversion and asset prices. J. Finance 65: 1303-32
84. Saha A. 1993. Expo-power utility: a 'flexible' form for absolute and relative risk aversion. Am. J. Agric. Econ. 75: 905-13
85. Schoemaker P. 1982. The expected utility model: its variants, purposes, evidence and limitations. J. Econ. Lit. 20: 529-63
86. Segal U, Spivak A. 1990. First order versus second order risk aversion. J. Econ. Theory 51: 111-25
87. Slovic P, Tversky A. 1974. Who accepts Savage's axiom? Behav. Sci. 19: 368-73
88. Snowberg E, Wolfers J. 2010. Explaining the favorite-longshot bias: Is it risk-love or misperceptions? J. Polit. Econ. 118: 723-46
89. Sobel R, RyanM. 2008. Unifying the favorite-longshot bias with other market anomalies. In Handbook of Sports and Lottery Markets, ed. D Hausch,WZiemba, pp. 137-60. Amsterdam: North Holland
90. Spalt O. 2012. Probability weighting and employee stock options. J. Financ. Quant. Anal. In Press
91. Starmer C. 2000. Developments in non-expected utility theory: the hunt for a descriptive theory of choice under risk. J. Econ. Lit. 38: 332-82
92. Stott H. 2006. Cumulative prospect theory's functional menagerie. J. Risk Uncertain. 32: 101-30
93. Sugden R. 2003. Reference-dependent subjective expected utility. J. Econ. Theory 111: 172-91
94. Sugden R. 2004. Alternatives to expected utility: foundations. In Handbook of Utility Theory, Vol. 2: Extensions, ed. S Barbera, P Hammond, C Seidl, pp. 685-755. Dordrecht: Kluwer
95. Sydnor J. 2010. (Over)insuring modest risks. Am. Econ. J. Appl. Econ. 2: 177-99
96. Tversky A, Kahneman D. 1992. Advances in prospect theory: cumulative representation of uncertainty. J. Risk Uncertain. 5: 297-323
97. van de Kuilen G, Wakker P. 2011. The midweight method to measure attitudes towards risk and ambiguity. Manag. Sci. 57: 582-98
98. Wakker P. 2010. Prospect Theory for Risk and Ambiguity. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge Univ. Press
99. Wakker P, Thaler R, Tversky A. 1997. Probabilistic insurance. J. Risk Uncertain. 15: 7-28
100. Walther H. 2003. Normal-randomness expected utility, time preference and emotional distortions. J. Econ. Behav. Organ. 52: 253-66
101. Yaari M. 1987. The dual theory of choice under risk. Econometrica 55: 95-115