A Context-Dependent Model of the Gambling Effect
This paper presents a context-dependent theory of decision under risk. The relevant contextual factor is the presence of a riskless lottery in a preference comparison. The theory only deviates from expected utility if the set of options contains both riskless and risky lotteries. The main motivation for the theory is to explain the gambling effect. Contrary to previous theories of the gambling effect, the present theory is consistent with stochastic dominance. It can, however, violate transitivity. The theory allows for a decomposition of the interaction between risk aversion and gambling aversion and thereby extends the classical Arrow-Pratt measure of risk aversion.
Volume (Year): 48 (2002)
Issue (Month): 6 (June)
|Contact details of provider:|| Postal: 7240 Parkway Drive, Suite 300, Hanover, MD 21076 USA|
Web page: http://www.informs.org/
More information through EDIRC
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.:
- Mark McCord & Richard de Neufville, 1986. ""Lottery Equivalents": Reduction of the Certainty Effect Problem in Utility Assessment," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 32(1), pages 56-60, January.
- Ulrich Schmidt, 2001. "Lottery Dependent Utility: a Reexamination," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 50(1), pages 35-58, February.
- Loomes, Graham & Sugden, Robert, 1982. "Regret Theory: An Alternative Theory of Rational Choice under Uncertainty," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 92(368), pages 805-824, December.
- Lakshmi-Ratan, Ramnath A. & Lanning, Steven G. & Rotondo, John A., 1991. "An aggregate contextual choice model for estimating demand for new products from a laboratory choice experiment," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 23(3), pages 201-218, November.
- Peter Wakker & Daniel Deneffe, 1996. "Eliciting von Neumann-Morgenstern Utilities When Probabilities Are Distorted or Unknown," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 42(8), pages 1131-1150, August.
- Huber, Joel & Puto, Christopher, 1983. " Market Boundaries and Product Choice: Illustrating Attraction and Substitution Effects," Journal of Consumer Research, Oxford University Press, vol. 10(1), pages 31-44, June.
- Harless, David W & Camerer, Colin F, 1994. "The Predictive Utility of Generalized Expected Utility Theories," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 62(6), pages 1251-1289, November.
- Ebbe Groes & Hans Jacobsen & Birgitte Sloth & Torben Tranæs, 1999.
"Testing the Intransitivity Explanation of the Allais Paradox,"
Theory and Decision,
Springer, vol. 47(3), pages 229-245, December.
- Ebbe Groes & Hans Jørgen Jacobsen & Birgitte Sloth & Torben Tranæs, 1997. "Testing the Intransitivity Explanation of the Allais Paradox," CIE Discussion Papers 1998-18, University of Copenhagen. Department of Economics. Centre for Industrial Economics, revised Oct 1998.
- Peter Fishburn, 1980. "A simple model for the utility of gambling," Psychometrika, Springer;The Psychometric Society, vol. 45(4), pages 435-448, December.
- 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.
- Chris Starmer, 1992. "Testing New Theories of Choice under Uncertainty using the Common Consequence Effect," Review of Economic Studies, Oxford University Press, vol. 59(4), pages 813-830.
- Gafni, Amiram & Birch, Stephen & Mehrez, Abraham, 1993. "Economics, health and health economics: HYEs versus QALYs," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 12(3), pages 325-339, October.
- Neilson, William S., 1992. "Some mixed results on boundary effects," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 39(3), pages 275-278, July.
- Sugden Robert, 1993. "An Axiomatic Foundation for Regret Theory," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 60(1), pages 159-180, June.
- Kahneman, Daniel & Tversky, Amos, 1979. "Prospect Theory: An Analysis of Decision under Risk," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 47(2), pages 263-291, March.
- Amos Tversky & Daniel Kahneman, 1979. "Prospect Theory: An Analysis of Decision under Risk," Levine's Working Paper Archive 7656, David K. Levine.
- Loomes, Graham & Starmer, Chris & Sugden, Robert, 1991. "Observing Violations of Transitivity by Experimental Methods," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 59(2), pages 425-439, March.
- Fishburn, Peter C, 1991. "Nontransitive Preferences in Decision Theory," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 4(2), pages 113-134, April.
- Rothschild, Michael & Stiglitz, Joseph E., 1970. "Increasing risk: I. A definition," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 2(3), pages 225-243, September.
- Huber, Joel & Payne, John W & Puto, Christopher, 1982. " Adding Asymmetrically Dominated Alternatives: Violations of Regularity and the Similarity Hypothesis," Journal of Consumer Research, Oxford University Press, vol. 9(1), pages 90-98, June.
- Sugden, Robert, 1985. "Why Be Consistent? A Critical Analysis of Consistency Requirements in Choice Theory," Economica, London School of Economics and Political Science, vol. 52(206), pages 167-183, May.
- Humphrey, Steven J., 1998. "More mixed results on boundary effects," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 61(1), pages 79-84, October.
- Loomes, Graham, 1995. "The myth of the HYE," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 14(1), pages 1-7, May.
- Conlisk, John, 1993. "The Utility of Gambling," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 6(3), pages 255-275, June. Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)