IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/r/cor/louvco/1987016.html
   My bibliography  Save this item

Consequentialist foundations for expected utility

Citations

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


Cited by:

  1. Jean-Marc Tallon & Jean-Christophe Vergnaud, 2006. "Beliefs and Dynamic Consistency," Chapters,in: Knowledge, Beliefs and Economics, chapter 7 Edward Elgar Publishing.
  2. Hammond, Peter J., 1999. "Non-Archimedean subjective probabilities in decision theory and games," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 38(2), pages 139-156, September.
  3. Katie Steele, 2010. "What are the minimal requirements of rational choice? Arguments from the sequential-decision setting," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 68(4), pages 463-487, April.
  4. Marc Fleurbaey, 2010. "Assessing Risky Social Situations," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 118(4), pages 649-680, August.
  5. Robert Kast & André Lapied & Pascal Toquebeuf, 2008. "Updating Choquet Integrals , Consequentialism and Dynamic Consistency," ICER Working Papers - Applied Mathematics Series 04-2008, ICER - International Centre for Economic Research.
  6. John D. Hey, 2005. "Do People (Want To) Plan?," Scottish Journal of Political Economy, Scottish Economic Society, vol. 52(1), pages 122-138, February.
  7. Bruno S. Frey & Alois Stutzer, 2005. "Beyond outcomes: measuring procedural utility," Oxford Economic Papers, Oxford University Press, vol. 57(1), pages 90-111, January.
  8. Christian Schmidt, 2006. "Quelques points de rencontre entre économistes et psychologues," Revue économique, Presses de Sciences-Po, vol. 57(2), pages 242-257.
  9. Nathalie Etchart, 2002. "Adequate Moods for non-eu Decision Making in a Sequential Framework," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 52(1), pages 1-28, February.
  10. Grimalday, Gianluca & Karz, Anirban & Proto, Eugenio, 2012. "Everyone Wants a Chance: Initial Positions and Fairness in Ultimatum Games," CAGE Online Working Paper Series 93, Competitive Advantage in the Global Economy (CAGE).
  11. Alexander Ludwig & Alexander Zimper, 2013. "A decision-theoretic model of asset-price underreaction and overreaction to dividend news," Annals of Finance, Springer, vol. 9(4), pages 625-665, November.
  12. André Lapied & Pascal Tocquebeuf, 2007. "Consistent Dynamice Choice And Non-Expected Utility Preferences," Working Papers halshs-00353880, HAL.
  13. John Hey & Gianna Lotito, 2009. "Naive, resolute or sophisticated? A study of dynamic decision making," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 38(1), pages 1-25, February.
  14. Han Bleichrodt & José-Luis Pinto-Prades, 2004. "The Validity of QALYs Under Non-Expected Utility," Working Papers 113, Barcelona Graduate School of Economics.
  15. Ludwig, Alexander & Zimper, Alexander, 2006. "Investment behavior under ambiguity: The case of pessimistic decision makers," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 52(2), pages 111-130, September.
  16. Edward SchleeE, 1997. "The sure thing principle and the value of information," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 42(1), pages 21-36, January.
  17. Lotito, Gianna, 2007. "Resolute Choice in interaction: a qualitative experiment," POLIS Working Papers 94, Institute of Public Policy and Public Choice - POLIS.
  18. Border, K.C. & Segal, U., 1997. "Coherent Odds and Subjective Probability," UWO Department of Economics Working Papers 9717, University of Western Ontario, Department of Economics.
  19. Berg, Nathan & Biele, Guido & Gigerenzer, Gerd, 2010. "Does consistency predict accuracy of beliefs?: Economists surveyed about PSA," MPRA Paper 26590, University Library of Munich, Germany.
  20. Peter J. Hammond, 1997. "Subjectively Expected State-Independent Utility on State-Dependent Consequence Domains," Working Papers 97024, Stanford University, Department of Economics.
  21. Juan Perote Peña, 2003. "Ethical Implementation and the Creation of Moral Values," Economic Working Papers at Centro de Estudios Andaluces E2003/25, Centro de Estudios Andaluces.
  22. Charles Blackorby & David Donaldson & Philippe Mongin, 2004. "Social Aggregation Without the Expected Utility Hypothesis," Working Papers hal-00242932, HAL.
  23. Alexander Zimper, 2011. "Do Bayesians Learn Their Way Out of Ambiguity?," Decision Analysis, INFORMS, vol. 8(4), pages 269-285, December.
  24. John Hey & Massimo Paradiso., "undated". "Dynamic Choice and Timing-Independence: an experimental investigation," Discussion Papers 99/26, Department of Economics, University of York.
  25. A. Nebout, 2014. "Sequential decision making without independence: a new conceptual approach," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 77(1), pages 85-110, June.
  26. Siniscalchi, Marciano, 2011. "Dynamic choice under ambiguity," Theoretical Economics, Econometric Society, vol. 6(3), September.
  27. Yves SPRUMONT, 2009. "Relative Egalitarianism and Related Criteria," Cahiers de recherche 02-2009, Centre interuniversitaire de recherche en économie quantitative, CIREQ.
  28. Bruno S. Frey & Alois Stutzer, 2001. "Beyond Bentham – Measuring Procedural Utility," CESifo Working Paper Series 492, CESifo Group Munich.
  29. d'Aspremont, Claude & Gevers, Louis, 2002. "Social welfare functionals and interpersonal comparability," Handbook of Social Choice and Welfare,in: K. J. Arrow & A. K. Sen & K. Suzumura (ed.), Handbook of Social Choice and Welfare, edition 1, volume 1, chapter 10, pages 459-541 Elsevier.
  30. Marc Le Menestrel, 2001. "A Process Approach to the Utility for Gambling," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 50(3), pages 249-262, May.
  31. Ken Binmore, "undated". "A Utilitarian Theory of Political Legitimacy," ELSE working papers 031, ESRC Centre on Economics Learning and Social Evolution.
  32. Joseph Johnson & Jerome Busemeyer, 2001. "Multiple-Stage Decision-Making: The Effect of Planning Horizon Length on Dynamic Consistency," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 51(2), pages 217-246, December.
  33. O’Callaghan, Patrick, 2011. "Context and Decision: Utility on a Union of Mixture Spaces," The Warwick Economics Research Paper Series (TWERPS) 973, University of Warwick, Department of Economics.
  34. Sacco, Pier Luigi, 1996. "Subjective metaphysics and learning from experience: The causal psychology of rational choice," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 17(2), pages 221-244, April.
  35. Jeffrey R. Brown & Arie Kapteyn & Olivia S. Mitchell, 2016. "Framing And Claiming: How Information-Framing Affects Expected Social Security Claiming Behavior," Journal of Risk & Insurance, The American Risk and Insurance Association, vol. 83(1), pages 139-162, January.
  36. Iskhakov, Fedor, 2008. "Dynamic Programming Model of Health and Retirement," Memorandum 03/2008, Oslo University, Department of Economics.
  37. Enrico Diecidue, 2006. "Deriving Harsanyi’s Utilitarianism from De Finetti’s Book-Making Argument," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 61(4), pages 363-371, December.
  38. Marc Le Menestrel, 2003. "A one-shot Prisoners’ Dilemma with procedural utility," Economics Working Papers 819, Department of Economics and Business, Universitat Pompeu Fabra.
  39. Michele Bernasconi, 2002. "How should income be divided? questionnaire evidence from the theory of “Impartial preferences”," Journal of Economics, Springer, vol. 9(1), pages 163-195, December.
  40. John Hey & Luca Panaccione, 2011. "Dynamic decision making: what do people do?," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 42(2), pages 85-123, April.
IDEAS is a RePEc service hosted by the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis . RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.