IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/emx/esteco/v22y2007i1p99-109.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Preferences for Shifts in Probabilities and Expected Utility Theory

Author

Listed:
  • David Cantalá

    (El Colegio de México, A. C.)

Abstract

We translate preferences over lotteries into preferences over “shifts in probabilities†. We define the independence axiom for such preferences. Next we construct and expected utility function to represent the preferences and present the corresponding additive geometry.

Suggested Citation

  • David Cantalá, 2007. "Preferences for Shifts in Probabilities and Expected Utility Theory," Estudios Económicos, El Colegio de México, Centro de Estudios Económicos, vol. 22(1), pages 99-109.
    • Handle: RePEc:emx:esteco:v:22:y:2007:i:1:p:99-109
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://estudioseconomicos.colmex.mx/index.php/economicos/article/view/147/449
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Machina, Mark J, 1987. "Choice under Uncertainty: Problems Solved and Unsolved," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 1(1), pages 121-154, Summer.
    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. Karla Flores Zarur & William José Olvera López & Leobardo Plata Pérez, 2023. "A note about the different characterizations of the expected utility theorem/Una nota sobre las diferentes caracterizaciones del teorema de la utilidad esperada," Estudios Económicos, El Colegio de México, Centro de Estudios Económicos, vol. 38(1), pages 167-181.

    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. Dionne, G. & Doherty, N., 1991. "Adverse Selection In Insurance Markets: A Selective Survey," Cahiers de recherche 9105, Centre interuniversitaire de recherche en économie quantitative, CIREQ.
    2. Gordon Cordina, 2004. "Economic Vulnerability And Economic Growth: Some Results From A Neo-Classical Growth Modelling Approach," Journal of Economic Development, Chung-Ang Unviersity, Department of Economics, vol. 29(2), pages 21-39, December.
    3. Serrao, Amilcar & Coelho, Luis, 2004. "Cumulative Prospect Theory: A Study Of The Farmers' Decision Behavior In The Alentejo Dryland Region Of Portugal," 2004 Annual meeting, August 1-4, Denver, CO 20245, American Agricultural Economics Association (New Name 2008: Agricultural and Applied Economics Association).
    4. Raj Chetty, 2004. "Consumption Commitments, Unemployment Durations, and Local Risk Aversion," NBER Working Papers 10211, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    5. Dagsvik, John K., 2015. "Stochastic models for risky choices: A comparison of different axiomatizations," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 60(C), pages 81-88.
    6. Simone Cerreia‐Vioglio & David Dillenberger & Pietro Ortoleva, 2015. "Cautious Expected Utility and the Certainty Effect," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 83, pages 693-728, March.
    7. Robert S. Chirinko & Edward P. Harper, 1993. "Buckle up or slow down? New estimates of offsetting behavior and their implications for automobile safety regulation," Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 12(2), pages 270-296.
    8. Z. Bar‐Shira & R.E. Just & D. Zilberman, 1997. "Estimation of farmers' risk attitude: an econometric approach," Agricultural Economics, International Association of Agricultural Economists, vol. 17(2-3), pages 211-222, December.
    9. Richard O. Zerbe, 1998. "Is cost-benefit analysis legal? Three rules," Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 17(3), pages 419-456.
    10. Bikhchandani, Sushil & Segal, Uzi, 2014. "Transitive regret over statistically independent lotteries," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 152(C), pages 237-248.
    11. Basieva, Irina & Khrennikova, Polina & Pothos, Emmanuel M. & Asano, Masanari & Khrennikov, Andrei, 2018. "Quantum-like model of subjective expected utility," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 78(C), pages 150-162.
    12. Finkelshtain, Israel & Feinerman, Eli, 1997. "Framing the Allais paradox as a daily farm decision problem: tests and explanations," Agricultural Economics, Blackwell, vol. 15(3), pages 155-167, January.
    13. Starmer, Chris, 1999. "Experimental Economics: Hard Science or Wasteful Tinkering?," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 109(453), pages 5-15, February.
    14. Alexander Galetovic & Ángel Cabrera, "undated". "Tópicos en la Economía de la Investigación Tecnológica," Documentos de Trabajo 121, Instituto de Economia. Pontificia Universidad Católica de Chile..
    15. Bruno S. Frey, 1991. "Demand for, and Supply of, Institutions," Rationality and Society, , vol. 3(2), pages 258-260, April.
    16. Riddel, Mary C. & Shaw, W. Douglass, 2006. "A Theoretically-Consistent Empirical Non-Expected Utility Model of Ambiguity: Nuclear Waste Mortality Risk and Yucca Mountain," Pre-Prints 23964, Texas A&M University, Department of Agricultural Economics.
    17. Machina Mark J. & Schmeidler David, 1995. "Bayes without Bernoulli: Simple Conditions for Probabilistically Sophisticated Choice," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 67(1), pages 106-128, October.
    18. Toman, Michael, 1998. "Sustainable Decisionmaking: The State of the Art from an Economics Perspective," RFF Working Paper Series dp-98-39, Resources for the Future.
    19. Yang, Jiping & Qiu, Wanhua, 2005. "A measure of risk and a decision-making model based on expected utility and entropy," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 164(3), pages 792-799, August.
    20. Subir Sen & S Madheswaran, 2013. "Regional determinants of life insurance consumption: evidence from selected Asian economies," Asian-Pacific Economic Literature, The Crawford School, The Australian National University, vol. 27(2), pages 86-103, November.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    expected utility theory; cardinality;

    JEL classification:

    • D81 - Microeconomics - - Information, Knowledge, and Uncertainty - - - Criteria for Decision-Making under Risk and Uncertainty

    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:emx:esteco:v:22:y:2007:i:1:p:99-109. 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: Ximena Varela (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/cecolmx.html .

    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.