IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/pra/mprapa/22378.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Estimation of Peaked Densities Over the Interval [0,1] Using Two-Sided Power Distribution: Application to Lottery Experiments

Author

Listed:
  • Kontek, Krzysztof

Abstract

This paper deals with estimating peaked densities over the interval [0,1] using two-sided power distribution (Kotz, van Dorp, 2004). Such data were encountered in experiments determining certainty equivalents of lotteries (Kontek, 2010). This paper summarizes the basic properties of the two-sided power distribution (TP) and its generalized form (GTP). The GTP maximum likelihood estimator, a result not derived by Kotz and van Dorp, is presented. The TP and GTP are used to estimate certainty equivalent densities in two data sets from lottery experiments. The obtained results show that even a two-parametric TP distribution provides more accurate estimates than the smooth three-parametric generalized beta distribution GBT (Libby, Novick, 1982) in one of the considered data sets. The three-parametric GTP distribution outperforms GBT for these data. The results are, however, the very opposite for the second data set, in which the data are greatly scattered. The paper demonstrates that the TP and GTP distributions may be extremely useful in estimating peaked densities over the interval [0,1] and in studying the relative utility function.

Suggested Citation

  • Kontek, Krzysztof, 2010. "Estimation of Peaked Densities Over the Interval [0,1] Using Two-Sided Power Distribution: Application to Lottery Experiments," MPRA Paper 22378, University Library of Munich, Germany.
  • Handle: RePEc:pra:mprapa:22378
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://mpra.ub.uni-muenchen.de/22378/1/MPRA_paper_22378.pdf
    File Function: original version
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Kontek, Krzysztof, 2010. "Density Based Regression for Inhomogeneous Data: Application to Lottery Experiments," MPRA Paper 22268, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    2. Ulrich Schmidt & Stefan Traub, 2009. "An Experimental Investigation of the Disparity Between WTA and WTP for Lotteries," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 66(3), pages 229-262, March.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

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


    Cited by:

    1. Krzysztof Kontek, 2010. "Maximum likelihood estimator for the uneven power distribution: application to DJI returns," Working Papers 43, Department of Applied Econometrics, Warsaw School of Economics.

    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. Raphaël Giraud, 2010. "On the interpretation of the WTP/WTA gap as imprecise utility: an axiomatic analysis," Economics Bulletin, AccessEcon, vol. 30(1), pages 692-701.
    2. Shavit Tal & Benzion Uri & Shahrabani Shosh, 2010. "Risk attitude in lotteries offering real products and monetary outcomes," International Journal of Economic Theory, The International Society for Economic Theory, vol. 6(2), pages 253-261, June.
    3. Hongli Xu & Hai Yang & Jing Zhou & Yafeng Yin, 2017. "A Route Choice Model with Context-Dependent Value of Time," Transportation Science, INFORMS, vol. 51(2), pages 536-548, May.
    4. Kontek, Krzysztof, 2010. "Mean, Median or Mode? A Striking Conclusion From Lottery Experiments," MPRA Paper 21758, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    5. Heinrich, Timo & Seifert, Matthias & Then, Franziska, 2020. "Near-losses in insurance markets: An experiment," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 186(C).
    6. Roth, Gerrit, 2006. "Predicting the Gap between Willingness to Accept and Willingness to Pay," Munich Dissertations in Economics 4901, University of Munich, Department of Economics.
    7. Marcin Isabel & Nicklisch Andreas, 2017. "Testing the Endowment Effect for Default Rules," Review of Law & Economics, De Gruyter, vol. 13(2), pages 1-27, July.
    8. Raphaël Giraud, 2012. "Money matters: an axiomatic theory of the endowment effect," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 50(2), pages 303-339, June.
    9. Isabel Marcin & Andreas Nicklisch, 2014. "Testing the Endowment Effect for Default Rules," Discussion Paper Series of the Max Planck Institute for Research on Collective Goods 2014_01, Max Planck Institute for Research on Collective Goods.
    10. Shosh Shahrabani & Uri Benzion & Tal Shavit, 2008. "WTP and WTA in competitive and non-competitive environments," Judgment and Decision Making, Society for Judgment and Decision Making, vol. 3, pages 153-161, February.
    11. Christina McGranaghan & Steven G. Otto, 2022. "Choice uncertainty and the endowment effect," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 65(1), pages 83-104, August.
    12. Tunçel, Tuba & Hammitt, James K., 2014. "A new meta-analysis on the WTP/WTA disparity," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 68(1), pages 175-187.
    13. Chen Li & Zhihua Li & Peter Wakker, 2014. "If nudge cannot be applied: a litmus test of the readers’ stance on paternalism," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 76(3), pages 297-315, March.
    14. Tibor Neugebauer, 2010. "Moral Impossibility in the Petersburg Paradox : A Literature Survey and Experimental Evidence," LSF Research Working Paper Series 10-14, Luxembourg School of Finance, University of Luxembourg.
    15. Kontek, Krzysztof, 2010. "Density Based Regression for Inhomogeneous Data: Application to Lottery Experiments," MPRA Paper 22268, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    16. Uri Benzion & Shosh Shahrabani & Tal Shavit, 2013. "Retesting The Uncertainty Effect Using Lotteries With Real Products And Money," Bulletin of Economic Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 65, pages 175-186, May.
    17. Robert Reilly & Douglas Davis, 2015. "The effects of uncertainty on the WTA–WTP gap," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 78(2), pages 261-272, February.
    18. Trautmann, Stefan T. & Traxler, Christian, 2010. "Reserve prices as reference points - Evidence from auctions for football players at Hattrick.org," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 31(2), pages 230-240, April.
    19. Cathleen Johnson & Aurélien Baillon & Han Bleichrodt & Zhihua Li & Dennie Dolder & Peter P. Wakker, 2021. "Prince: An improved method for measuring incentivized preferences," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 62(1), pages 1-28, February.
    20. repec:cup:judgdm:v:3:y:2008:i::p:153-161 is not listed on IDEAS
    21. John Hey & Andrea Morone & Ulrich Schmidt, 2009. "Noise and bias in eliciting preferences," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 39(3), pages 213-235, December.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Density Distribution; Maximum Likelihood Estimation; Lottery experiments; Relative Utility Function.;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • C51 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Econometric Modeling - - - Model Construction and Estimation
    • C16 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Econometric and Statistical Methods and Methodology: General - - - Econometric and Statistical Methods; Specific Distributions
    • C46 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Econometric and Statistical Methods: Special Topics - - - Specific Distributions
    • C91 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Design of Experiments - - - Laboratory, Individual Behavior
    • D03 - Microeconomics - - General - - - Behavioral Microeconomics: Underlying Principles
    • C13 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Econometric and Statistical Methods and Methodology: General - - - Estimation: General
    • C02 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - General - - - Mathematical Economics
    • C21 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Single Equation Models; Single Variables - - - Cross-Sectional Models; Spatial Models; Treatment Effect Models
    • C01 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - General - - - Econometrics
    • D87 - Microeconomics - - Information, Knowledge, and Uncertainty - - - Neuroeconomics

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    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:pra:mprapa:22378. 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: Joachim Winter (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/vfmunde.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.