IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/wly/riskan/v1y1981i4p241-250.html

The Saint Petersburg Game: An Exposition of the Classical Treatment

Author

Listed:
  • William H. Ruckle

Abstract

An early attempt to measure risk was the 1738 paper of Bernoulli in which he describes the well‐known Saint Petersburg paradox. Subsequent writers have considered this game to draw conclusions about the nature of risk or to test newly devised risk models. We analyze the paradox, evaluate various theories which have been advanced to resolve it, and briefly examine the implications of these theories on the wider area of risk analysis.

Suggested Citation

  • William H. Ruckle, 1981. "The Saint Petersburg Game: An Exposition of the Classical Treatment," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 1(4), pages 241-250, December.
    • Handle: RePEc:wly:riskan:v:1:y:1981:i:4:p:241-250
    DOI: 10.1111/j.1539-6924.1981.tb01424.x
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1539-6924.1981.tb01424.x
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1111/j.1539-6924.1981.tb01424.x?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
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Shapley, Lloyd S., 1977. "The St. Petersburg paradox: A con games?," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 14(2), pages 439-442, April.
    2. Stanley Kaplan & B. John Garrick, 1981. "On The Quantitative Definition of Risk," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 1(1), pages 11-27, March.
    3. Brito, D. L., 1975. "Becker's theory of the allocation of time and the St. Petersburg Paradox," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 10(1), pages 123-126, February.
    4. Shapley, Lloyd S., 1977. "Lotteries and menus: A comment on unbounded utilities," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 14(2), pages 446-453, April.
    5. Milton Friedman & L. J. Savage, 1948. "The Utility Analysis of Choices Involving Risk," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 56(4), pages 279-279.
    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. Christian Seidl, 2013. "The St. Petersburg Paradox at 300," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 46(3), pages 247-264, June.
    2. Paola Modesti, 2025. "On Specimen Theoriae Novae de Mensura Sortis of Daniel Bernoulli," Decisions in Economics and Finance, Springer;Associazione per la Matematica, vol. 48(1), pages 775-793, June.
    3. James C. Cox & Eike B. Kroll & Marcel Lichters & Vjollca Sadiraj & Bodo Vogt, 2019. "The St. Petersburg paradox despite risk-seeking preferences: an experimental study," Business Research, Springer;German Academic Association for Business Research, vol. 12(1), pages 27-44, April.
    4. Vivian, Robert William, 2003. "Solving Daniel Bernoulli's St Petersburg Paradox: The Paradox which is not and never was," MPRA Paper 5233, University Library of Munich, Germany, revised 2003.
    5. Mamoru Kaneko, 2020. "Toward a Resolution of the St.Petersburg Paradox," Working Papers 2014, Waseda University, Faculty of Political Science and Economics.
    6. Benjamin Y. Hayden & Michael L. Platt, 2009. "The mean, the median, and the St. Petersburg paradox," Judgment and Decision Making, Society for Judgment and Decision Making, vol. 4(4), pages 256-272, June.
    7. Bronshtein, E. & Fatkhiev, O., 2018. "A Note on St. Petersburg Paradox," Journal of the New Economic Association, New Economic Association, vol. 38(2), pages 48-53.
    8. Lehmann, Daniel, 2001. "Expected Qualitative Utility Maximization," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 35(1-2), pages 54-79, April.
    9. Ralph F. Miles, 2004. "Risk‐Adjusted Mission Value: Trading Off Mission Risk for Mission Value," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 24(2), pages 415-424, April.
    10. Heineck, Guido & Süssmuth, Bernd, 2013. "A different look at Lenin’s legacy: Social capital and risk taking in the Two Germanies," Journal of Comparative Economics, Elsevier, vol. 41(3), pages 789-803.
    11. Edi Karni & Philippe Mongin, 2000. "On the Determination of Subjective Probability by Choices," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 46(2), pages 233-248, February.
    12. Christian Johnson & George G Kaufman, 2007. "Un banco, con cualquier otro nombre…," Boletín, CEMLA, vol. 0(4), pages 185-199, Octubre-d.
    13. Nicholas Barberis, 2012. "A Model of Casino Gambling," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 58(1), pages 35-51, January.
    14. Hooi Hooi Lean & Michael McAleer & Wing-Keung Wong, 2013. "Risk-averse and Risk-seeking Investor Preferences for Oil Spot and Futures," Documentos de Trabajo del ICAE 2013-31, Universidad Complutense de Madrid, Facultad de Ciencias Económicas y Empresariales, Instituto Complutense de Análisis Económico, revised Aug 2013.
    15. S. Cucurachi & E. Borgonovo & R. Heijungs, 2016. "A Protocol for the Global Sensitivity Analysis of Impact Assessment Models in Life Cycle Assessment," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 36(2), pages 357-377, February.
    16. Martin Kukuk & Stefan Winter, 2008. "An Alternative Explanation of the Favorite-Longshot Bias," Journal of Gambling Business and Economics, University of Buckingham Press, vol. 2(2), pages 79-96, September.
    17. Naritomi, Joana & Nyamdavaa, Tsogsag & Campbell, Stephanie, 2025. "Enlisting consumers in tax enforcement: a policy review," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 127223, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    18. Evgeny Kagan & Alexander Rybalov, 2022. "Subjective Trusts and Prospects: Some Practical Remarks on Decision Making with Imperfect Information," SN Operations Research Forum, Springer, vol. 3(1), pages 1-24, March.
    19. Michel M. Denuit & Louis Eeckhoudt, 2010. "A General Index of Absolute Risk Attitude," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 56(4), pages 712-715, April.
    20. Egozcue, Martín & García, Luis Fuentes & Wong, Wing-Keung & Zitikis, Ricardas, 2011. "Do investors like to diversify? A study of Markowitz preferences," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 215(1), pages 188-193, November.

    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:wly:riskan:v:1:y:1981:i:4:p:241-250. 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: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://doi.org/10.1111/(ISSN)1539-6924 .

    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.