IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/transb/v56y2013icp81-95.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Prospect Theory for joint time and money consequences in risk and ambiguity

Author

Listed:
  • Kemel, Emmanuel
  • Paraschiv, Corina

Abstract

Transport users face complex decisions. Not only are the consequences of their choices uncertain, but they generally involve several attributes, such as time and money. Time-money tradeoffs have been studied in depth in transport economics, and research is now paying increasing attention to the role of uncertainty and information in transport decisions. This paper aims to measure the impact of uncertainty and information on multi-attribute decisions using Prospect Theory. In doing so, the study makes two contributions to transportation literature: one methodological and the other empirical. First, we propose a fast and tractable method for measuring Prospect Theory parameters that capture attitudes towards probabilities (probability weighting function) and attitudes towards losses (loss aversion). The elicitation method does not require the elicitation of the utility function. This makes it particularly suitable in complex multi-attribute decisions where the shape of the utility function is unknown. Second, we present the results of an experiment that uses the proposed method to measure, at the individual level, probability weighting in decisions involving joint time and money consequences in two decision contexts: risk (where probabilities are given) and ambiguity (where the probability distribution is unknown). An experimental setup that exposes subjects to real gains and losses for money and time has been built for this purpose. We observe inverse S-shaped probability weighting and loss aversion for risk. Probability weighting is even more pronounced in ambiguity, where subjects do not have precise information about the probability distribution. We explain how these results and the analysis of ambiguity attitudes in general can offer a better understanding of travelers’ route or transport mode choices.

Suggested Citation

  • Kemel, Emmanuel & Paraschiv, Corina, 2013. "Prospect Theory for joint time and money consequences in risk and ambiguity," Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Elsevier, vol. 56(C), pages 81-95.
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:transb:v:56:y:2013:i:c:p:81-95
    DOI: 10.1016/j.trb.2013.07.007
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0191261513001227
    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. Olivier L’Haridon & Lætitia Placido, 2010. "Betting on Machina’s reflection example: an experiment on ambiguity," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 69(3), pages 375-393, September.
    2. Erel Avineri & Joseph Prashker, 2006. "The Impact of Travel Time Information on Travelers’ Learning under Uncertainty," Transportation, Springer, vol. 33(4), pages 393-408, July.
    3. Hensher, David A. & Greene, William H. & Li, Zheng, 2011. "Embedding risk attitude and decision weights in non-linear logit to accommodate time variability in the value of expected travel time savings," Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Elsevier, vol. 45(7), pages 954-972, August.
    4. Wakker,Peter P., 2010. "Prospect Theory," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521765015.
    5. Xu, Hongli & Lou, Yingyan & Yin, Yafeng & Zhou, Jing, 2011. "A prospect-based user equilibrium model with endogenous reference points and its application in congestion pricing," Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Elsevier, vol. 45(2), pages 311-328, February.
    6. Lindsey, Robin, 2011. "State-dependent congestion pricing with reference-dependent preferences," Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Elsevier, vol. 45(10), pages 1501-1526.
    7. Keeney,Ralph L. & Raiffa,Howard, 1993. "Decisions with Multiple Objectives," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521438834, December.
    8. Adrian Bruhin & Helga Fehr-Duda & Thomas Epper, 2010. "Risk and Rationality: Uncovering Heterogeneity in Probability Distortion," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 78(4), pages 1375-1412, July.
    9. Train,Kenneth E., 2009. "Discrete Choice Methods with Simulation," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521766555.
    10. Eran Ben-Elia & Ido Erev & Yoram Shiftan, 2008. "The combined effect of information and experience on drivers’ route-choice behavior," Transportation, Springer, vol. 35(2), pages 165-177, March.
    11. Kahneman, Daniel & Tversky, Amos, 1979. "Prospect Theory: An Analysis of Decision under Risk," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 47(2), pages 263-291, March.
    12. Mohammed Abdellaoui & Han Bleichrodt & Olivier L’Haridon, 2008. "A tractable method to measure utility and loss aversion under prospect theory," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 36(3), pages 245-266, June.
    13. Drazen Prelec, 1998. "The Probability Weighting Function," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 66(3), pages 497-528, May.
    14. 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.
    15. John D. Hey & Chris Orme, 2018. "Investigating Generalizations Of Expected Utility Theory Using Experimental Data," World Scientific Book Chapters,in: Experiments in Economics Decision Making and Markets, chapter 3, pages 63-98 World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd..
    16. Ben-Elia, Eran & Shiftan, Yoram, 2010. "Which road do I take? A learning-based model of route-choice behavior with real-time information," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 44(4), pages 249-264, May.
    17. Andre Palma & Moshe Ben-Akiva & David Brownstone & Charles Holt & Thierry Magnac & Daniel McFadden & Peter Moffatt & Nathalie Picard & Kenneth Train & Peter Wakker & Joan Walker, 2008. "Risk, uncertainty and discrete choice models," Marketing Letters, Springer, vol. 19(3), pages 269-285, December.
      • André de Palma & Moshe Ben-Akiva & David Brownstone & Charles Holt & Thierry Magnac & Daniel McFadden & Peter Moffatt & Nathalie Picard & Kenneth Train & Peter Wakker & Joan Walker, 2008. "Risk, Uncertainty and Discrete Choice Models," THEMA Working Papers 2008-02, THEMA (THéorie Economique, Modélisation et Applications), Université de Cergy-Pontoise.
    18. Connors, Richard D. & Sumalee, Agachai, 2009. "A network equilibrium model with travellers' perception of stochastic travel times," Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Elsevier, vol. 43(6), pages 614-624, July.
    19. Hjorth, Katrine & Fosgerau, Mogens, 2012. "Using prospect theory to investigate the low marginal value of travel time for small time changes," Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Elsevier, vol. 46(8), pages 917-932.
    20. Henry Stott, 2006. "Cumulative prospect theory's functional menagerie," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 32(2), pages 101-130, March.
    21. Robert B. Noland & John W. Polak, 2002. "Travel time variability: A review of theoretical and empirical issues," Transport Reviews, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 22(1), pages 39-54, January.
    22. Guotao Hu & Aruna Sivakumar & John Polak, 2012. "Modelling travellers’ risky choice in a revealed preference context: a comparison of EUT and non-EUT approaches," Transportation, Springer, vol. 39(4), pages 825-841, July.
    23. Tomomi Tanaka & Colin F. Camerer & Quang Nguyen, 2010. "Risk and Time Preferences: Linking Experimental and Household Survey Data from Vietnam," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 100(1), pages 557-571, March.
    24. Aurélien Baillon & Laure Cabantous & Peter Wakker, 2012. "Aggregating imprecise or conflicting beliefs: An experimental investigation using modern ambiguity theories," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 44(2), pages 115-147, April.
    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. Emmanuel Kemel & Muriel Travers, 2016. "Comparing attitudes toward time and toward money in experience-based decisions," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 80(1), pages 71-100, January.
    2. repec:eee:phsmap:v:502:y:2018:i:c:p:77-92 is not listed on IDEAS
    3. Müller, Julia & Li, Zhihua & Wakker, Peter P. & Wang, Tong V., 2016. "The Rich Domain of Ambiguity Explored," Annual Conference 2016 (Augsburg): Demographic Change 145734, Verein für Socialpolitik / German Economic Association.
    4. repec:eee:transb:v:102:y:2017:i:c:p:1-21 is not listed on IDEAS
    5. Li, Xue-yan & Li, Xue-mei & Li, Xue-wei & Qiu, He-ting, 2017. "Multi-agent fare optimization model of two modes problem and its analysis based on edge of chaos," Physica A: Statistical Mechanics and its Applications, Elsevier, vol. 469(C), pages 405-419.

    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:transb:v:56:y:2013:i:c:p:81-95. 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: (Dana Niculescu). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/wps/find/journaldescription.cws_home/548/description#description .

    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 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.

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

    IDEAS is a RePEc service hosted by the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis . RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.