On the intuition of rank-dependent utility

被引:142
作者
Diecidue, E [1 ]
Wakker, PP [1 ]
机构
[1] Tilburg Univ, CentER, NL-5000 LE Tilburg, Netherlands
关键词
rank-dependence; comonotonicity; Choquet integral; pessimism; uncertainty aversion; prospect theory;
D O I
10.1023/A:1011877808366
中图分类号
F8 [财政、金融];
学科分类号
0202 ;
摘要
Among the most popular models for decision under risk and uncertainty are the rank-dependent models, introduced by Quiggin and Schmeidler. Central concepts in these models are rank-dependence and comonotonicity. It has been suggested that these concepts are technical tools that have no intuitive or empirical content. This paper describes such contents. As a result, rank-dependence and comonotonicity become natural concepts upon which preference conditions. empirical tests, and improvements in utility measurement can be based. Further, a new derivation of the rank-dependent models is obtained. It is not based on observable preference axioms or on empirical data, but naturally follows from the intuitive perspective assumed. We think that the popularity of the rank-dependent theories is mainly due to the natural concepts used in these theories.
引用
收藏
页码:281 / 298
页数:18
相关论文
共 69 条
[1]   Parameter-free elicitation of utility and probability weighting functions [J].
Abdellaoui, M .
MANAGEMENT SCIENCE, 2000, 46 (11) :1497-1512
[2]  
ABDELLAOUI M, 1999, IN PRESS ECONOMETRIC
[3]  
ABDELLAOUI M, 1999, TESTING CONSISTENCY
[4]  
ALLAIS M, 1953, C INT CTR NATIONAL R, V40, P257
[5]  
[Anonymous], 1966, Lectures on functional equations and their applications
[6]  
[Anonymous], COMPOSITION RISK PRE
[7]  
Arrow K.J., 1972, UNCERTAINTY EXPECTAT
[8]   If mathematics is informal, then perhaps we should accept that economics must be informal too [J].
Backhouse, RE .
ECONOMIC JOURNAL, 1998, 108 (451) :1848-1858
[9]   DISAPPOINTMENT IN DECISION-MAKING UNDER UNCERTAINTY [J].
BELL, DE .
OPERATIONS RESEARCH, 1985, 33 (01) :1-27
[10]   Violations of branch independence in choices between gambles [J].
Birnbaum, MH ;
McIntosh, WR .
ORGANIZATIONAL BEHAVIOR AND HUMAN DECISION PROCESSES, 1996, 67 (01) :91-110