IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/arx/papers/2607.22085.html

Neilson's Weak vs. Strong Loss Aversion: A Characterization and a Generalized CPT-Utility Function

Author

Listed:
  • Symeon Vaidanis
  • Marios Kountouris

Abstract

In multi-objective and multi-criteria decision-making under risk, especially in settings involving individual behavior, risk-aware analysis based on subjective evaluation has become increasingly important. Moving beyond risk-neutral modeling and the constraints of Expected Utility Theory (EUT), Cumulative Prospect Theory (CPT) provides a behaviorally grounded framework for capturing how individuals perceive and evaluate risky prospects. This paper conducts a rigorous theoretical analysis of Neilson's definitions of aversion. We provide a gamble-based interpretation, sharpen key conceptual distinctions, and make explicit the conditions under which the weak and strong notions coincide as well as when they diverge. Furthermore, we examine the Kobberling-Wakker utility function and related standard CPT specifications, highlighting structural limitations and inconsistencies that arise when these forms are required to satisfy Neilson-type aversion conditions. To address these issues, we propose a generalized CPT-utility function that retains the canonical reference-dependent shape while offering additional flexibility. This generalization extends the descriptive scope of CPT and provides an explicit functional form that is useful for sensitivity analysis and utility function-based optimization.

Suggested Citation

  • Symeon Vaidanis & Marios Kountouris, 2026. "Neilson's Weak vs. Strong Loss Aversion: A Characterization and a Generalized CPT-Utility Function," Papers 2607.22085, arXiv.org.
  • Handle: RePEc:arx:papers:2607.22085
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://arxiv.org/pdf/2607.22085
    File Function: Latest version
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    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:arx:papers:2607.22085. 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: arXiv administrators (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://arxiv.org/ .

    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.