Advanced Search
MyIDEAS: Login to save this article or follow this journal

Nonlinear Preferences and Two-Stage Lotteries: Theories and Evidence

Contents:

Author Info

  • Bernasconi, Michele

Abstract

Nonlinear preferences models are theories for choice under risk which have weakened in one way or another the Independence Axiom of Expected Utility. In this paper we present an experiment designed to discriminate between some basic ideas in this literature. We tested the Betweenness axiom, a weaker form of Independence, against an alternative which predicts that indifference curves in the probabilities simplex are convex along the lower edge and concave along the hypotenuse. We also checked whether preferences among single-stage lotteries, as those revealed by our test of Betweenness, should be extended to preferences among two-stage lottery via the classical Reduction of Compound Lottery axiom or via the Certainty Equivalent Mechanism. Copyright 1994 by Royal Economic Society.

Download Info

If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.
File URL: http://links.jstor.org/sici?sici=0013-0133%28199401%29104%3A422%3C54%3ANPATLT%3E2.0.CO%3B2-0&origin=bc
File Function: full text
Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to JSTOR subscribers. See http://www.jstor.org for details.

As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to look for a different version under "Related research" (further below) or search for a different version of it.

Bibliographic Info

Article provided by Royal Economic Society in its journal The Economic Journal.

Volume (Year): 104 (1994)
Issue (Month): 422 (January)
Pages: 54-70

as in new window
Handle: RePEc:ecj:econjl:v:104:y:1994:i:422:p:54-70

Contact details of provider:
Postal: Office of the Secretary-General, School of Economics and Finance, University of St. Andrews, St. Andrews, Fife, KY16 9AL, UK
Phone: +44 1334 462479
Email:
Web page: http://www.res.org.uk/
More information through EDIRC

Order Information:
Web: http://www.blackwellpublishers.co.uk/asp/journal.asp?ref=0013-0133

Related research

Keywords:

References

No references listed on IDEAS
You can help add them by filling out this form.

Citations

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

Cited by:
  1. Astrid Hopfensitz & Frans van Winden, 2007. "Dynamic Choice, Independence and Emotions," CESifo Working Paper Series 1949, CESifo Group Munich.
  2. Bruno S. Frey, 2005. "Knight Fever: Towards an Economics of Awards," CREMA Working Paper Series 2005-12, Center for Research in Economics, Management and the Arts (CREMA).
  3. Simone Cerreia-Vioglio & David Dillenberger & Pietro Ortoleva, 2013. "Cautious Expected Utility and the Certainty Effect," PIER Working Paper Archive 13-037, Penn Institute for Economic Research, Department of Economics, University of Pennsylvania.
  4. Amit Kothiyal & Vitalie Spinu & Peter Wakker, 2014. "An experimental test of prospect theory for predicting choice under ambiguity," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 48(1), pages 1-17, February.
  5. Liang Zou, 2006. "An Alternative to Prospect Theory," Annals of Economics and Finance, Society for AEF, vol. 7(1), pages 1-28, May.
  6. Michele Bernasconi, 2002. "How should income be divided? questionnaire evidence from the theory of “Impartial preferences”," Journal of Economics, Springer, vol. 9(1), pages 163-195, December.
  7. Nathalie Etchart-Vincent, 2002. "Adequate Moods for non-EU Decision Making in a Sequential Framework," Post-Print halshs-00004830, HAL.
  8. repec:dgr:uvatin:2006087 is not listed on IDEAS
  9. Blavatskyy, Pavlo R., 2006. "Violations of betweenness or random errors?," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 91(1), pages 34-38, April.
  10. Pavlo R. Blavatskyy, . "A Stochastic Expected Utility Theory," IEW - Working Papers 231, Institute for Empirical Research in Economics - University of Zurich.
  11. repec:hal:ciredw:halshs-00004832 is not listed on IDEAS
  12. Pavlo Blavatskyy, 2004. "Axiomatization of a Preference for Most Probably Winner," CERGE-EI Working Papers wp226, The Center for Economic Research and Graduate Education - Economic Institute, Prague.
  13. Pavlo R. Blavatskyy, . "Axiomatization of a Preference for Most Probable Winner," IEW - Working Papers 230, Institute for Empirical Research in Economics - University of Zurich.
  14. Robin Cubitt & Chris Starmer & Robert Sugden, 1998. "On the Validity of the Random Lottery Incentive System," Experimental Economics, Springer, vol. 1(2), pages 115-131, September.
  15. Pavlo Blavatskyy, 2007. "Stochastic expected utility theory," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 34(3), pages 259-286, June.

Lists

This item is not listed on Wikipedia, on a reading list or among the top items on IDEAS.

Statistics

Access and download statistics

Corrections

When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:ecj:econjl:v:104:y:1994:i:422:p:54-70. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Wiley-Blackwell Digital Licensing) or (Christopher F. Baum).

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.

If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.

If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link to it, you can help with 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 profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

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