Prospect Versus Utility
AbstractWe show how to calibrate a prospect model of decision making under risk for an individual. The prospect model is empirically compared to a utility model on two criteria, verification of the postulates of each model, and predictive accuracy. The empirical comparison is performed via three experiments. In Experiment 1, predictive accuracy of the models is compared in nonparadoxical situations, those which favor neither model. In contrast the predictions in Experiment 2 are for paradoxical choices, those which favor the prospect model. In Experiment 1, the prospect model is compared to a model comprising a utility function which permits separate risk attitudes for gain and losses, and hence is more flexible than a utility model as traditionally assessed. In contrast the utility model in Experiment 3 is assessed as is traditionally done assuming constant risk attitude across gains and losses. Several calibration procedures are contrasted across experiments. Our results show a high degree of consistency with the postulates of both models. On predictive accuracy the prospect model outperforms the utility model for paradoxical choices. However, for nonparadoxical situations there is little difference in the predictive ability of both models.
Download InfoIf 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.
Bibliographic InfoArticle provided by INFORMS in its journal Management Science.
Volume (Year): 35 (1989)
Issue (Month): 1 (January)
marketing; buyer behavior; utility/preference theory; value theory;
You can help add them by filling out this form.
CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
- Lahdelma, Risto & Salminen, Pekka, 2009. "Prospect theory and stochastic multicriteria acceptability analysis (SMAA)," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 37(5), pages 961-971, October.
- Enrico Diecidue & Ulrich Schmidt & Horst Zank, 2008.
"Parametric Weighting Functions,"
Kiel Working Papers
1395, Kiel Institute for the World Economy.
- Enrico Diecidue & Ulrich Schmidt & Horst Zank, 2006. "Parametric Weighting Functions," The School of Economics Discussion Paper Series 0622, Economics, The University of Manchester.
- Zank, Horst & Schmidt, Ulrich & Diecidue, Enrico, 2007. "Parametric Weighting Functions," Economics Working Papers 2007,01, Christian-Albrechts-University of Kiel, Department of Economics.
- Coelho, Luís Alberto Godinho & Pires, Cesaltina Maria Pacheco & Dionísio, Andreia Teixeira & Serrão, Amílcar Joaquim da Conceição, 2012. "The impact of CAP policy in farmer's behavior – A modeling approach using the Cumulative Prospect Theory," Journal of Policy Modeling, Elsevier, vol. 34(1), pages 81-98.
- Lévesque, Moren & Schade, Christian, 2002. "Intuitive optimizing for time allocation decisions in newly formed ventures," SFB 373 Discussion Papers 2002,24, Humboldt University of Berlin, Interdisciplinary Research Project 373: Quantification and Simulation of Economic Processes.
- Glaser, Markus, 2001. "Behavioral Financial Engineering: eine Fallstudie zum Rationalen Entscheiden," Sonderforschungsbereich 504 Publications 01-06, Sonderforschungsbereich 504, Universität Mannheim & Sonderforschungsbereich 504, University of Mannheim.
- Diecidue, Enrico & Wakker, Peter P, 2001.
" On the Intuition of Rank-Dependent Utility,"
Journal of Risk and Uncertainty,
Springer, vol. 23(3), pages 281-98, November.
- Loehman, Edna, 1998. "Testing risk aversion and nonexpected utility theories," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 33(2), pages 285-302, January.
- Peter Brooks & Horst Zank, 2005. "Loss Averse Behavior," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 31(3), pages 301-325, December.
- Schunk, Daniel & Winter, Joachim, 2009.
"The relationship between risk attitudes and heuristics in search tasks: A laboratory experiment,"
Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization,
Elsevier, vol. 71(2), pages 347-360, August.
- Schunk, Daniel & Winter, Joachim, 2007. "The Relationship Between Risk Attitudes and Heuristics in Search Tasks: A Laboratory Experiment," Discussion Papers in Economics 1377, University of Munich, Department of Economics.
- Schunk, Daniel & Winter, Joachim, 2004. "The Relationship Between Risk Attitudes and Heuristics in Search Tasks: A Laboratory Experiment," Sonderforschungsbereich 504 Publications 04-23, Sonderforschungsbereich 504, Universität Mannheim & Sonderforschungsbereich 504, University of Mannheim.
- Daniel Schunk & Joachim Winter, 2005. "The Relationship Between Risk Attitudes and Heuristics in Search Tasks: A Laboratory Experiment," MEA discussion paper series 05077, Munich Center for the Economics of Aging (MEA) at the Max Planck Institute for Social Law and Social Policy.
- McAlvanah, Patrick, 2010. "Subadditivity, patience, and utility: The effects of dividing time intervals," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 76(2), pages 325-337, November.
- Horst Zank, 2007. "On the Paradigm of Loss Aversion," The School of Economics Discussion Paper Series 0710, Economics, The University of Manchester.
- Schunk, Daniel, 2009. "Behavioral heterogeneity in dynamic search situations: Theory and experimental evidence," Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control, Elsevier, vol. 33(9), pages 1719-1738, September.
- Manrai, Ajay K., 1995. "Mathematical models of brand choice behavior," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 82(1), pages 1-17, April.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Mirko Janc).
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.