IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/pal/genrir/v20y1995i1p111-133.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

A Comparison of the Estimates of Expected Utility and Non-Expected-Utility Preference Functionals

Author

Listed:
  • Enrica Carbone

    (Department of Economics and Related Studies, University of York, YO1 5DD Heslington, York, UK)

  • John D. Hey

    (Department of Economics and Related Studies, University of York, YO1 5DD Heslington, York, UK)

Abstract

This paper extends the literature on the estimation of expected utility and non-expected-utility preference functionals (and the consequent exploration of the superiority of non-expected-utility over expected utility preference functionals) to a comparison of two different ways (pairwise choice and complete ranking) of experimentally obtaining data on such preferences. What is revealed is that the magnitude of the subject error is clearly conditional on the elicitation method used and, rather alarmingly, that the preference functional apparently employed by the subject may also be conditional on the elicitation method. The Geneva Papers on Risk and Insurance Theory (1995) 20, 111–133. doi:10.1007/BF01098961

Suggested Citation

  • Enrica Carbone & John D. Hey, 1995. "A Comparison of the Estimates of Expected Utility and Non-Expected-Utility Preference Functionals," The Geneva Risk and Insurance Review, Palgrave Macmillan;International Association for the Study of Insurance Economics (The Geneva Association), vol. 20(1), pages 111-133, June.
    • Handle: RePEc:pal:genrir:v:20:y:1995:i:1:p:111-133
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.palgrave-journals.com/grir/journal/v20/n1/pdf/grir199566a.pdf
    File Function: Link to full text PDF
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    File URL: http://www.palgrave-journals.com/grir/journal/v20/n1/full/grir199566a.html
    File Function: Link to full text HTML
    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. Bruno Jullien & Bernard Salanie, 2000. "Estimating Preferences under Risk: The Case of Racetrack Bettors," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 108(3), pages 503-530, June.
    2. Nuno Garoupa, 1998. "Crime and punishment: Further results," Economics Working Papers 344, Department of Economics and Business, Universitat Pompeu Fabra.
    3. Felix Holzmeister & Matthias Stefan, 2021. "The risk elicitation puzzle revisited: Across-methods (in)consistency?," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 24(2), pages 593-616, June.
    4. Felix Holzmeister & Matthias Stefan, 2019. "The risk elicitation puzzle revisited: Across-methods (in)consistency?," Working Papers 2019-19, Faculty of Economics and Statistics, Universität Innsbruck.
    5. Holzmeister, Felix & Stefan, Matthias, 2019. "The Risk Elicitation Puzzle Revisited: Across-Methods (In)consistency?," OSF Preprints pj9u2, Center for Open Science.

    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:pal:genrir:v:20:y:1995:i:1:p:111-133. 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.palgrave-journals.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.