Author
Abstract
Purpose - The purpose of this paper is to argue that Bernoulli's “utility function solution to the St Petersburg paradox” was wrong and to find a new method to solve the paradox. Design/methodology/approach - This goal is attained through two ways: using Bernoulli's and Kramer's utility function to construct new paradoxes; and designing and implementing a new St Petersburg game which does not carry the effect of diminishing marginal utility. Findings - In this paper, the author finds that Bernoulli's “utility function solution to the St Petersburg paradox” was wrong, and also finds a new model to solve the paradox, which is also a brand‐new model of estimates under uncertainty. Research limitations/implications - Bernoulli put forward the diminishing marginal utility of currency and thus accordingly provided the utility function solution to solve the paradox. This paper indicates that the Bernoulli's utility function solution does not work. Thus, further research needs to be taken in several aspects: is the diminishing marginal utility of currency tenable? Does the marginal utility of currency decrease monotonically? Are concave utility functions represented by negative index functions which are widely used in theoretical study reasonable? Practical implications - The paper proposes a brand‐new possible research idea and direction for economic theoretical researches based on uncertainty. Originality/value - This paper proved the untenability of the utility function solution to solve the St Petersburg paradox for the first time and proposed the pioneering “risk adjustment model” of estimates under uncertainty.
Suggested Citation
Wang Wen Hui, 2011.
"A new solution to the St Petersburg paradox and estimates under uncertainty,"
China Finance Review International, Emerald Group Publishing Limited, vol. 1(3), pages 204-219, July.
Handle:
RePEc:eme:cfripp:v:1:y:2011:i:3:p:204-219
DOI: 10.1108/20441391111144086
Download full text from publisher
As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to
for a different version of it.
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:eme:cfripp:v:1:y:2011:i:3:p:204-219. 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.
We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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: Emerald Support (email available below). General contact details of provider: .
Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through
the various RePEc services.