IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/chf/rpseri/rp0919.html

A Satiscing Alternative to Prospect Theory

Author

Listed:
  • David B. BROWN

    (Fuqua School of Business, Duke University)

  • Enrico G. DE GIORGI

    (University of St. Gallen, Swiss Finance Institute and University of Lugano)

  • Melvyn SIM

    (NUS Business School, NUS Risk Management Institute, National University of Singapore)

Abstract

In this paper, we axiomatize a target-based model of choice that allows decision makers to be both risk averse and risk seeking, depending on the payoff's position relative to a pre- specified target. The approach can be viewed as a hybrid model, capturing in spirit two celebrated ideas: first, the satisficing concept of Simon (1955); second, the switch between risk aversion and risk seeking popularized by the prospect theory of Kahneman and Tversky (1979). Our axioms are simple and intuitive; in order to be implemented in practice, our approach requires only the specification of an aspiration level. We show that this approach is dual to a known approach using risk measures, thereby allowing us to connect to existing theory. Though our approach is intended to be normative, we also show that it resolves the classical paradoxes of Allais (1953) and Ellsberg (1961), neither of which can be explained by expected utility theory.

Suggested Citation

  • David B. BROWN & Enrico G. DE GIORGI & Melvyn SIM, 2009. "A Satiscing Alternative to Prospect Theory," Swiss Finance Institute Research Paper Series 09-19, Swiss Finance Institute.
  • Handle: RePEc:chf:rpseri:rp0919
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://ssrn.com/abstract=1406399
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL:
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Other versions of this item:

    Citations

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


    Cited by:

    1. is not listed on IDEAS
    2. Enrico G. De Giorgi, 2009. "Goal-Based Investing with Cumulative Prospect Theory and Satisficing Behavior," University of St. Gallen Department of Economics working paper series 2009 2009-22, Department of Economics, University of St. Gallen.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;

    JEL classification:

    • D81 - Microeconomics - - Information, Knowledge, and Uncertainty - - - Criteria for Decision-Making under Risk and Uncertainty
    • G11 - Financial Economics - - General Financial Markets - - - Portfolio Choice; Investment Decisions

    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:chf:rpseri:rp0919. 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: Ridima Mittal (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/fameech.html .

    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.