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

Testing the Effects of Similarity on Risky Choice: Implications for Violations of Expected Utility

Contents:

Author Info

  • David Buschena

    ()

  • David Zilberman

Abstract

No abstract is available for this item.

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://hdl.handle.net/10.1023/A:1005066504527
Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.

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 Springer in its journal Theory and Decision.

Volume (Year): 46 (1999)
Issue (Month): 3 (June)
Pages: 253-280

as in new window
Handle: RePEc:kap:theord:v:46:y:1999:i:3:p:253-280

Contact details of provider:
Web page: http://www.springerlink.com/link.asp?id=100341

Related research

Keywords: Discrete choice probit models; Expected utility; Independence violations; Risk;

References

References listed on IDEAS
Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:
as in new window
  1. John Leland, 2010. "Generalized Similarity Judgments: An Alternative Explanation for Choice Anomalies," Levine's Working Paper Archive 7644, David K. Levine.
  2. Buschena, David & Zilberman, David, 1995. "Performance of the Similarity Hypothesis Relative to Existing Models of Risky Choice," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 11(3), pages 233-62, December.
  3. Rubinstein, Ariel, 1988. "Similarity and decision-making under risk (is there a utility theory resolution to the Allais paradox?)," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 46(1), pages 145-153, October.
  4. Conlisk, John, 1989. "Three Variants on the Allais Example," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 79(3), pages 392-407, June.
  5. Heiner, Ronald A., 1988. "Imperfect decisions in organizations : Toward a theory of internal structure," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 9(1), pages 25-44, January.
  6. John Conlisk, 1996. "Why Bounded Rationality?," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 34(2), pages 669-700, June.
  7. Harless, David W & Camerer, Colin F, 1994. "The Predictive Utility of Generalized Expected Utility Theories," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 62(6), pages 1251-89, November.
  8. Sileo Patrick W., 1995. "Intransitivity of Indifference, Strong Monotonicity, and the Endowment Effect," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 66(1), pages 198-223, June.
  9. Camerer, Colin F, 1989. " An Experimental Test of Several Generalized Utility Theories," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 2(1), pages 61-104, April.
  10. Conlisk, John, 1988. "Optimization cost," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 9(3), pages 213-228, April.
  11. Tversky, Amos & Kahneman, Daniel, 1992. " Advances in Prospect Theory: Cumulative Representation of Uncertainty," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 5(4), pages 297-323, October.
  12. Hey, John D & Orme, Chris, 1994. "Investigating Generalizations of Expected Utility Theory Using Experimental Data," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 62(6), pages 1291-1326, November.
  13. Aizpurua, J M, et al, 1993. " Similarity and Preferences in the Space of Simple Lotteries," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 6(3), pages 289-97, June.
  14. Harless, David W., 1992. "Predictions about indifference curves inside the unit triangle : A test of variants of expected utility theory," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 18(3), pages 391-414, August.
  15. Harless, David, 1993. "Experimental tests of prospective reference theory," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 43(1), pages 71-76.
  16. Wilcox, Nathaniel T, 1993. "Lottery Choice: Incentives, Complexity and Decision Time," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 103(421), pages 1397-1417, November.
  17. Radner, Roy & Rothschild, Michael, 1975. "On the allocation of effort," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 10(3), pages 358-376, June.
  18. Viscusi, W Kip, 1989. " Prospective Reference Theory: Toward an Explanation of the Paradoxes," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 2(3), pages 235-63, September.
Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

Citations

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

Cited by:
  1. Konstantinos Katsikopoulos & Gerd Gigerenzer, 2008. "One-reason decision-making: Modeling violations of expected utility theory," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 37(1), pages 35-56, August.
  2. Edward J. Webb, 2014. "Perception and quality choice in vertically differentiated markets," Discussion Papers 14-07, University of Copenhagen. Department of Economics.
  3. Butler, David & Loomes, Graham, 2011. "Imprecision as an account of violations of independence and betweenness," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 80(3), pages 511-522.
  4. Guerdjikova, Ani, 2008. "Case-based learning with different similarity functions," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 63(1), pages 107-132, May.
  5. Buschena, David E. & Atwood, Joseph A., 2011. "Evaluation of similarity models for expected utility violations," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 162(1), pages 105-113, May.
  6. Guerdjikova, Ani, 2006. "Portfolio Choice and Asset Prices in an Economy Populated by Case-Based Decision Makers," Working Papers 06-13, Cornell University, Center for Analytic Economics.
  7. Jim Engle-Warnick & Javier Escobal & Sonia Laszlo, 2006. "The Effect of an Additional Alternative on Measured Risk Preferences in a Laboratory Experiment in Peru," CIRANO Working Papers 2006s-06, CIRANO.

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:kap:theord:v:46:y:1999:i:3:p:253-280. 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: (Guenther Eichhorn) 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.