IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/kap/jrisku/v26y2003i1p55-76.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Reassessing the Testing of Generic Utility Models for Mixed Gambles

Author

Listed:
  • Chechile, Richard A
  • Butler, Susan F

Abstract

Miyamoto's generic utility theory (GUT) is a bilinear form that captures a diverse set of utility formulations. The present study, using mixed gambles, experimentally evaluates GUT in a fashion similar to the Chechile and Cooke and the Chechile and Butler studies, but employs a novel method of analysis. The reasons for the new method is to solve a fundamental flaw with the regression approach used in the earlier experiments and to solve a problem of model overfit. Several participants from the earlier Chechile and Butler experiment are now recognized as being consistent with the GUT representation, but many are not. A new experiment, with actual economic consequences for the participants, does not support GUT. Suggestions are provided for subsequent research studies assessing the GUT class of models. Copyright 2003 by Kluwer Academic Publishers

Suggested Citation

  • Chechile, Richard A & Butler, Susan F, 2003. "Reassessing the Testing of Generic Utility Models for Mixed Gambles," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 26(1), pages 55-76, January.
    • Handle: RePEc:kap:jrisku:v:26:y:2003:i:1:p:55-76
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://journals.kluweronline.com/issn/0895-5646/contents
    File Function: link to full text
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    ---><---

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

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. George Wu & Alex B. Markle, 2008. "An Empirical Test of Gain-Loss Separability in Prospect Theory," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 54(7), pages 1322-1335, July.

    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:kap:jrisku:v:26:y:2003:i:1:p:55-76. 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: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    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.