IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/taf/eujhet/v24y2017i6p1318-1354.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Expected utility theory and experimental utility measurement, 1950–1985. From confidence to scepticism

Author

Listed:
  • Ivan Moscati

Abstract

The paper reconstructs the history of the experimental attempts to measure the cardinal utility of money between 1950 and 1985 within the framework provided by expected utility theory (EUT). It is shown that this history displays a definite trajectory: from the confidence in EUT and the EUT-based measurement of utility of the 1950s to the scepticism that, from the mid-1970s, haunted the validity of EUT as well as the significance of the utility measures obtained through it. By exploring the diverse aspects and causes of this trajectory, the paper covers new ground in the history of both decision theory and utility measurement.

Suggested Citation

  • Ivan Moscati, 2017. "Expected utility theory and experimental utility measurement, 1950–1985. From confidence to scepticism," The European Journal of the History of Economic Thought, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 24(6), pages 1318-1354, November.
    • Handle: RePEc:taf:eujhet:v:24:y:2017:i:6:p:1318-1354
    DOI: 10.1080/09672567.2017.1378692
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1080/09672567.2017.1378692
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1080/09672567.2017.1378692?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

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

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Dhami, Sanjit, 2016. "The Foundations of Behavioral Economic Analysis," OUP Catalogue, Oxford University Press, number 9780198715535.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Markus Dertwinkel-Kalt & Jonas Frey, 2020. "Optimal Stopping in a Dynamic Salience Model," CESifo Working Paper Series 8496, CESifo.
    2. Gruener, Sven, 2019. "An empirical study on Internet-based false news stories: experiences, problem awareness, and responsibilities," SocArXiv xbez9, Center for Open Science.
    3. Ortiz-Riomalo, Juan Felipe & Koessler, Ann-Kathrin & Engel, Stefanie, 2021. "Inducing perspective-taking for prosocial behaviour in natural resource management," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 110(C).
    4. Dhami, Sanjit & Wei, Mengxing & Mamidi, Pavan, 2024. "Religious identity, trust, reciprocity, and prosociality: Theory and evidence," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 166(C).
    5. Sanjit Dhami & Ali al-Nowaihi, 2016. "Social responsibility, human morality and public policy," Discussion Papers in Economics 16/20, Division of Economics, School of Business, University of Leicester.
    6. Sanjit Dhami & Emma Manifold & Ali al-Nowaihi, 2018. "Prosociality, Political Identity, and Redistribution of Earned Income: Theory and Evidence," CESifo Working Paper Series 7256, CESifo.
    7. Sanjit Dhami & Emma Manifold & Ali al‐Nowaihi, 2021. "Identity and Redistribution: Theory and Evidence," Economica, London School of Economics and Political Science, vol. 88(350), pages 499-531, April.
    8. Carrillo, Paul & Emran, M. Shahe, 2018. "Loss Aversion, Transaction Costs, or Audit Trigger? Learning about Corporate Tax Compliance from a Policy Experiment with Withholding Regime," MPRA Paper 87445, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    9. Dubra, Juan & Egozcue, Martín & García, Luis Fuentes, 2019. "Optimal consumption sequences under habit formation and satiation," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 80(C), pages 70-76.
    10. Minh T. Le & Alejandro Saporiti & Yizhi Wang, 2021. "Distributive politics with other‐regarding preferences," Journal of Public Economic Theory, Association for Public Economic Theory, vol. 23(2), pages 203-227, April.
    11. Shabnam Mousavi & Gerd Gigerenzer, 2017. "Heuristics are Tools for Uncertainty," Homo Oeconomicus: Journal of Behavioral and Institutional Economics, Springer, vol. 34(4), pages 361-379, December.
    12. Denis Fougere & Arthur Heim, 2019. "L'évaluation socioéconomique de l'investissement social: Comment mettre en oeuvre des analyses coûts-bénéfices pour les politiques d'emploi, de santé et d'éducation," Sciences Po publications info:hdl:2441/5lge9h8e809, Sciences Po.
    13. Dhami, Sanjit & Wei, Mengxing & al-Nowaihi, Ali, 2019. "Public goods games and psychological utility: Theory and evidence," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 167(C), pages 361-390.
    14. Sanjit Dhami & Narges Hajimoladarvish & Konstantinos Georgalos, 2023. "Precautionary Savings, Loss Aversion, and Risk: Theory and Evidence," CESifo Working Paper Series 10570, CESifo.
    15. Brice Corgnet, 2018. "Rac(g)e Against the Machine? Social Incentives When Humans Meet Robots," Post-Print halshs-01984467, HAL.
    16. Ciotti, Fabrizio & Hornuf, Lars & Stenzhorn, Eliza, 2021. "Lock-In Effects in Online Labor Markets," LIDAM Discussion Papers CORE 2021014, Université catholique de Louvain, Center for Operations Research and Econometrics (CORE).
    17. Fulin Guo, 2023. "Experience-weighted attraction learning in network coordination games," Papers 2310.18835, arXiv.org.
    18. Katharina Dowling & Daniel Guhl & Daniel Klapper & Martin Spann & Lucas Stich & Narine Yegoryan, 2020. "Behavioral biases in marketing," Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, Springer, vol. 48(3), pages 449-477, May.
    19. Kosfeld, Michael, 2019. "The Role of Leaders in Inducing and Maintaining Cooperation: The CC Strategy," IZA Discussion Papers 12540, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    20. Ghesla, Claus & Grieder, Manuel & Schubert, Renate, 2020. "Nudging the poor and the rich – A field study on the distributional effects of green electricity defaults," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 86(C).

    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:taf:eujhet:v:24:y:2017:i:6:p:1318-1354. 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: Chris Longhurst (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.tandfonline.com/REJH20 .

    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.