IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/aea/aecrev/v96y2006i4p1114-1136.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Cardinality versus Ordinality: A Suggested Compromise

Author

Listed:
  • Michael Mandler

Abstract

By taking sets of utility functions as primitive, we define an ordering over assumptions on utility functions that gauges their measurement requirements. Cardinal and ordinal assumptions constitute two levels of measurability, but other assumptions lie between these extremes. We apply the ordering to explanations of why preferences should be convex. The assumption that utility is concave qualifies as a compromise between cardinality and ordinality, while the Arrow-Koopmans explanation, supposedly an ordinal theory, relies on utilities in the cardinal measurement class. In social choice theory, a concavity compromise between ordinality and cardinality is also possible and rationalizes the core utilitarian policies. (JEL D01)

Suggested Citation

  • Michael Mandler, 2006. "Cardinality versus Ordinality: A Suggested Compromise," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 96(4), pages 1114-1136, September.
    • Handle: RePEc:aea:aecrev:v:96:y:2006:i:4:p:1114-1136
    Note: DOI: 10.1257/aer.96.4.1114
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.aeaweb.org/articles.php?doi=10.1257/aer.96.4.1114
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to AEA members and institutional subscribers.
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Bosi, Gianni & Herden, Gerhard, 2012. "Continuous multi-utility representations of preorders," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 48(4), pages 212-218.
    2. Pivato, Marcus, 2013. "Multiutility representations for incomplete difference preorders," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 66(3), pages 196-220.
    3. Paolo Giovanni Piacquadio, 2017. "A Fairness Justification of Utilitarianism," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 85, pages 1261-1276, July.
    4. Pivato, Marcus, 2010. "Aggregation of incomplete ordinal preferences with approximate interpersonal comparisons," MPRA Paper 25271, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    5. Dupoux, Marion & Martinet, Vincent, 2022. "Could the environment be a normal good for you and an inferior good for me? A theory of context-dependent substitutability and needs," Resource and Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 69(C).
    6. Shaofang Qi, 2016. "A characterization of the n-agent Pareto dominance relation," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 46(3), pages 695-706, March.
    7. Giarlotta, Alfio & Greco, Salvatore, 2013. "Necessary and possible preference structures," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 49(2), pages 163-172.
    8. Pivato, Marcus, 2010. "Approximate interpersonal comparisons of well-being," MPRA Paper 25224, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    9. Michael Mandler, 2021. "The lexicographic method in preference theory," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 71(2), pages 553-577, March.
    10. Rojas, Mariano, 2009. "Economía de la felicidad. Hallazgos relevantes respecto al ingreso y el bienestar," El Trimestre Económico, Fondo de Cultura Económica, vol. 0(303), pages 537-573, julio-sep.
    11. Pivato, Marcus, 2009. "Social choice with approximate interpersonal comparisons of well-being," MPRA Paper 17060, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    12. Evren, Özgür & Ok, Efe A., 2011. "On the multi-utility representation of preference relations," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 47(4-5), pages 554-563.

    More about this item

    JEL classification:

    • D01 - Microeconomics - - General - - - Microeconomic Behavior: Underlying Principles

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:aea:aecrev:v:96:y:2006:i:4:p:1114-1136. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Michael P. Albert (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/aeaaaea.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.