Volver a Working Papers

Paper #798

Título:
Resolving inconsistencies in utility measurement under risk: Tests of generalizations of expected utility
Autores:
Han Bleichrodt, José María Abellán-Perpiñan, JoséLuis Pinto y Ildefonso Méndez-Martínez
Fecha:
Enero 2005
Resumen:
This paper explores biases in the elicitation of utilities under risk and the contribution that generalizations of expected utility can make to the resolution of these biases. We used five methods to measure utilities under risk and found clear violations of expected utility. Of the theories studies, prospect theory was most consistent with our data. The main improvement of prospect theory over expected utility was in comparisons between a riskless and a risky prospect(riskless-risk methods). We observed no improvement over expected utility in comparisons between two risky prospects (risk-risk methods). An explanation why we found no improvement of prospect theory over expected utility in risk-risk methods may be that there was less overweighting of small probabilities in our study than has commonly been observed.
Palabras clave:
Utility Measurement, Nonexpected Utility, Prospect Theory, Health., Leex
Códigos JEL:
D81, I10
Área de investigación:
Economía Experimental y del Comportamiento / Economía Laboral, Pública, de Desarrollo y de la Salud

Descargar el paper en formato PDF