Expected utility theory and prospect theory: one wedding and a decent funeral

被引:217
|
作者
Harrison, Glenn W. [1 ]
Rutstrom, E. Elisabet [1 ]
机构
[1] Univ Cent Florida, Dept Econ, Coll Business Adm, Orlando, FL 32816 USA
基金
美国国家科学基金会;
关键词
Expected utility theory; Prospect theory; Mixture models; CHOICE CONTINGENT-VALUATION; RISK-AVERSION; MODEL; VARIABLES; DECISION; TESTS;
D O I
10.1007/s10683-008-9203-7
中图分类号
F [经济];
学科分类号
02 ;
摘要
Choice behavior is typically evaluated by assuming that the data is generated by one latent decision-making process or another. What if there are two (or more) latent decision-making processes generating the observed choices? Some choices might then be better characterized as being generated by one process, and other choices by the other process. A finite mixture model can be used to estimate the parameters of each decision process while simultaneously estimating the probability that each process applies to the sample. We consider the canonical case of lottery choices in a laboratory experiment and assume that the data is generated by expected utility theory and prospect theory decision rules. We jointly estimate the parameters of each theory as well as the fraction of choices characterized by each. The methodology provides the wedding invitation, and the data consummates the ceremony followed by a decent funeral for the representative agent model that assumes only one type of decision process. The evidence suggests support for each theory, and goes further to identify under what demographic domains one can expect to see one theory perform better than the other. We therefore propose a reconciliation of the debate over two of the dominant theories of choice under risk, at least for the tasks and samples we consider. The methodology is broadly applicable to a range of debates over competing theories generated by experimental and non-experimental data.
引用
收藏
页码:133 / 158
页数:26
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [21] UNBOUNDED UTILITY FUNCTIONS IN EXPECTED UTILITY THEORY
    FISHBURN, PC
    QUARTERLY JOURNAL OF ECONOMICS, 1976, 90 (01): : 163 - 168
  • [22] THE FAILURE OF EXPECTED-UTILITY THEORY AS A THEORY OF REASON
    HAMPTON, J
    ECONOMICS AND PHILOSOPHY, 1994, 10 (02) : 195 - 242
  • [23] Expected utility or prospect theory: Which better fits agent-based modeling of markets?
    Andre Lima de Castro, Paulo
    Barreto Teodoro, Anderson Rodrigo
    de Castro, Luciano Irineu
    Parsons, Simon
    JOURNAL OF COMPUTATIONAL SCIENCE, 2016, 17 : 97 - 102
  • [24] Defending expected utility theory - Response
    Rabin, M
    Thaler, RH
    JOURNAL OF ECONOMIC PERSPECTIVES, 2002, 16 (02): : 229 - 230
  • [25] Expected utility inequalities: theory and applications
    Zambrano, Eduardo
    ECONOMIC THEORY, 2008, 36 (01) : 147 - 158
  • [27] On the Rejectability of the Subjective Expected Utility Theory
    Grabiszewski, Konrad
    B E JOURNAL OF THEORETICAL ECONOMICS, 2016, 16 (02): : 437 - 454
  • [28] Boundedly rational expected utility theory
    Daniel Navarro-Martinez
    Graham Loomes
    Andrea Isoni
    David Butler
    Larbi Alaoui
    Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, 2018, 57 : 199 - 223
  • [29] Boundedly rational expected utility theory
    Navarro-Martinez, Daniel
    Loomes, Graham
    Isoni, Andrea
    Butler, David
    Alaoui, Larbi
    JOURNAL OF RISK AND UNCERTAINTY, 2018, 57 (03) : 199 - 223
  • [30] A Normative Interpretation of Expected Utility Theory
    Eric M. Cave
    The Journal of Value Inquiry, 2005, 39 : 431 - 441