Mathematics of Operations Research
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
 QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     


MATHEMATICS OF OPERATIONS RESEARCH
Vol. 28, No. 3, August 2003, pp. 395-423
DOI: 10.1287/moor.28.3.395.16390
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow References
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow reprints & permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Köbberling, V.
Right arrow Articles by Wakker, P. P.
Right arrow Search for Related Content

Preference Foundations for Nonexpected Utility: A Generalized and Simplified Technique

Veronika Köbberling, Peter P. Wakker

Department of Quantitative Economics, Maastricht University, P.O. Box 616, Maastricht 6200 MD, The Netherlands
Department of Quantitative Economics, Maastricht University, P.O. Box 616, Maastricht 6200 MD, The Netherlands

v.koebberling{at}ke.unimaas.nl
P.P.Wakker{at}UvA.nl

This paper examines a tradeoff-consistency technique for testing and axiomatically founding decision models. The technique modifies earlier tradeoff-consistency techniques by only considering indifferences, not strict preferences. The resulting foundations are both more general and more accessible than earlier results, and they are so regarding both the technical and the intuitive axioms. Axiomatizations based on other, bisymmetry-like, conditions also follow as corollaries from the results of this paper. The tradeoff technique is applied to three popular theories of individual decision under uncertainty and risk, i.e., expected utility, Choquet expected utility, and prospect theory. The conditions used are better suited for empirical measurements of utility than earlier tradeoff conditions and, accordingly, are easier to test.

Key Words: Comonotonic; prospect theory; tradeoff consistency; Choquet integral; rank-dependent; bisymmetry
History: Received: January 4, 2002; revision received: January 1, 2003;


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
Management ScienceHome page
H. Bleichrodt, U. Schmidt, and H. Zank
Additive Utility in Prospect Theory
Management Science, May 1, 2009; 55(5): 863 - 873.
[Abstract] [PDF]


Home page
Management ScienceHome page
M. Abdellaoui, H. Bleichrodt, and C. Paraschiv
Loss Aversion Under Prospect Theory: A Parameter-Free Measurement
Management Science, October 1, 2007; 53(10): 1659 - 1674.
[Abstract] [PDF]




HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
Copyright © 2003 by INFORMS.