IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/ecolet/v74y2002i3p347-351.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

A verification of the expected utility calibration theorem

Author

Listed:
  • Neilson, William S.
  • Winter, Harold

Abstract

No abstract is available for this item.

Suggested Citation

  • Neilson, William S. & Winter, Harold, 2002. "A verification of the expected utility calibration theorem," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 74(3), pages 347-351, February.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:ecolet:v:74:y:2002:i:3:p:347-351
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0165-1765(01)00570-5
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    ---><---

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

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Hansen, Lars Peter & Singleton, Kenneth J, 1983. "Stochastic Consumption, Risk Aversion, and the Temporal Behavior of Asset Returns," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 91(2), pages 249-265, April.
    2. Viscusi, W Kip, 1993. "The Value of Risks to Life and Health," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 31(4), pages 1912-1946, December.
    3. Viscusi, W. Kip & Moore, Michael J., 1989. "Rates of time preference and valuations of the duration of life," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 38(3), pages 297-317, April.
    4. Litzenberger, Robert H & Ronn, Ehud I, 1986. "A Utility-based Model of Common Stock Price Movements," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 41(1), pages 67-92, March.
    5. Matthew Rabin, 2000. "Risk Aversion and Expected-Utility Theory: A Calibration Theorem," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 68(5), pages 1281-1292, September.
    6. Matthew Rabin & Richard H. Thaler, 2013. "Anomalies: Risk aversion," World Scientific Book Chapters, in: Leonard C MacLean & William T Ziemba (ed.), HANDBOOK OF THE FUNDAMENTALS OF FINANCIAL DECISION MAKING Part I, chapter 27, pages 467-480, World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd..
    7. Segal, Uzi & Spivak, Avia, 1990. "First order versus second order risk aversion," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 51(1), pages 111-125, June.
    8. Grossman, Sanford J. & Shiller, Robert J., 1982. "Consumption correlatedness and risk measurement in economies with non-traded assets and heterogeneous information," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 10(2), pages 195-210, July.
    9. Cicchetti, Charles J & Dubin, Jeffrey A, 1994. "A Microeconometric Analysis of Risk Aversion and the Decision to Self-Insure," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 102(1), pages 169-186, February.
    10. Daniel Kahneman & Amos Tversky, 2013. "Prospect Theory: An Analysis of Decision Under Risk," World Scientific Book Chapters, in: Leonard C MacLean & William T Ziemba (ed.), HANDBOOK OF THE FUNDAMENTALS OF FINANCIAL DECISION MAKING Part I, chapter 6, pages 99-127, World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd..
    11. Chris Starmer, 2000. "Developments in Non-expected Utility Theory: The Hunt for a Descriptive Theory of Choice under Risk," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 38(2), pages 332-382, June.
    12. Brown, David P & Gibbons, Michael R, 1985. "A Simple Econometric Approach for Utility-based Asset Pricing Models," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 40(2), pages 359-381, June.
    13. William Neilson, 2001. "Calibration results for rank-dependent expected utility," Economics Bulletin, AccessEcon, vol. 4(10), pages 1-5.
    14. Friend, Irwin & Blume, Marshall E, 1975. "The Demand for Risky Assets," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 65(5), pages 900-922, December.
    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


    Cited by:

    1. Roe, Brian E. & Wu, Steven Y., 2003. "The Welfare Effects Of Banning Tournaments When Commitment Is Impossible: Some Results From The Broiler Sector," 2003 Annual meeting, July 27-30, Montreal, Canada 22151, American Agricultural Economics Association (New Name 2008: Agricultural and Applied Economics Association).

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Schmidt, Ulrich & Zank, Horst, 2009. "A simple model of cumulative prospect theory," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 45(3-4), pages 308-319, March.
    2. Alma Cohen & Liran Einav, 2007. "Estimating Risk Preferences from Deductible Choice," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 97(3), pages 745-788, June.
    3. Michał Lewandowski, 2017. "Prospect Theory Versus Expected Utility Theory: Assumptions, Predictions, Intuition and Modelling of Risk Attitudes," Central European Journal of Economic Modelling and Econometrics, Central European Journal of Economic Modelling and Econometrics, vol. 9(4), pages 275-321, December.
    4. Zvi Safra & Uzi Segal, 2005. "Are Universal Preferences Possible? Calibration Results for Non-Expected Utility Theories," Boston College Working Papers in Economics 633, Boston College Department of Economics.
    5. Kam Yu, 2009. "Measuring the Output and Prices of the Lottery Sector: An Application of Implicit Expected Utility Theory," NBER Chapters, in: Price Index Concepts and Measurement, pages 405-425, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    6. Roger Hartley & Gauthier Lanot & Ian Walker, 2014. "Who Really Wants To Be A Millionaire? Estimates Of Risk Aversion From Gameshow Data," Journal of Applied Econometrics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 29(6), pages 861-879, September.
    7. Peter P. Wakker, 2008. "Explaining the characteristics of the power (CRRA) utility family," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 17(12), pages 1329-1344.
    8. Ait-Sahalia, Yacine & Lo, Andrew W., 2000. "Nonparametric risk management and implied risk aversion," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 94(1-2), pages 9-51.
    9. Keith Blackburn & David Chivers, 2015. "Fearing the worst: the importance of uncertainty for inequality," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 60(2), pages 345-370, October.
    10. Matthew Rabin & Richard H. Thaler, 2013. "Anomalies: Risk aversion," World Scientific Book Chapters, in: Leonard C MacLean & William T Ziemba (ed.), HANDBOOK OF THE FUNDAMENTALS OF FINANCIAL DECISION MAKING Part I, chapter 27, pages 467-480, World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd..
    11. Simon Gächter & Eric J. Johnson & Andreas Herrmann, 2022. "Individual-level loss aversion in riskless and risky choices," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 92(3), pages 599-624, April.
    12. Peter Wakker & Veronika Köbberling & Christiane Schwieren, 2007. "Prospect-theory’s Diminishing Sensitivity Versus Economics’ Intrinsic Utility of Money: How the Introduction of the Euro can be Used to Disentangle the Two Empirically," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 63(3), pages 205-231, November.
    13. Garber, Alan M. & Phelps, Charles E., 1997. "Economic foundations of cost-effectiveness analysis," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 16(1), pages 1-31, February.
    14. repec:lan:wpaper:3312 is not listed on IDEAS
    15. P Brooks & H Zank, 2004. "Attitudes on Gain and Loss Lotteries: A Simple Experiment," Economics Discussion Paper Series 0402, Economics, The University of Manchester.
    16. Alan M. Garber & Charles E. Phelps, 1992. "Economic Foundations of Cost Effective Analysis," NBER Working Papers 4164, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    17. Neszveda, G., 2019. "Essays on behavioral finance," Other publications TiSEM 05059039-5236-42a3-be1b-3, Tilburg University, School of Economics and Management.
    18. Daniel Gottlieb & Olivia S. Mitchell, 2020. "Narrow Framing and Long‐Term Care Insurance," Journal of Risk & Insurance, The American Risk and Insurance Association, vol. 87(4), pages 861-893, December.
    19. Arie Harel & Jack Clark Francis & Giora Harpaz, 2018. "Alternative utility functions: review, analysis and comparison," Review of Quantitative Finance and Accounting, Springer, vol. 51(3), pages 785-811, October.
    20. Xiaosheng Mu & Luciano Pomatto & Philipp Strack & Omer Tamuz, 2020. "Background risk and small-stakes risk aversion," Papers 2010.08033, arXiv.org, revised Mar 2021.
    21. Luc Arrondel & André Masson & Daniel Verger, 2004. "De la théorie à une enquête méthodologique originale," Économie et Statistique, Programme National Persée, vol. 374(1), pages 21-51.

    More about this item

    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:eee:ecolet:v:74:y:2002:i:3:p:347-351. 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.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc 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 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: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/ecolet .

    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.