Eliciting von Neumann-Morgenstern Utilities When Probabilities Are Distorted or Unknown

Peter Wakker and Daniel Deneffe
Additional contact information
Daniel Deneffe: The Fuqua School of Business, Duke University, Durham, North Carolina 27706 and Management Education Institute, Arthur D. Little. Inc., Brussels, Belgium

Management Science, 1996, vol. 42, issue 8, 1131-1150

Abstract: This paper proposes a new method, the (gamble-)tradeoff method, for eliciting utilities in decision under risk or uncertainty. The elicitation of utilities, to be used in the expected utility criterion, turns out to be possible even if probabilities are ambiguous or unknown. A disadvantage of the tradeoff method is that a few more questions usually must be asked to clients. Also, the lotteries that are needed are somewhat more complex than in the certainty-equivalent method or in the probability-equivalent method. The major advantage of the tradeoff method is its robustness against probability distortions and misconceptions, which constitute a major cause of violations of expected utility and generate inconsistencies in utility elicitation. Thus the tradeoff method retains full validity under prospect theory, rank-dependent utility, and the combination of the two, i.e., cumulative prospect theory. The tradeoff method is tested for monetary outcomes and for outcomes describing life-duration. We find higher risk aversion for life duration, but the tradeoff method elicits similar curvature of utility. Apparently the higher risk aversion for life duration is due to more pronounced deviations from expected utility.

Keywords: utility measurement; probability distortion; prospect theory; decision analysis; risk aversion; standard gamble (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Date: 1996
References: Add references at CitEc
Citations: View citations in EconPapers (270)

Downloads: (external link)
http://dx.doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.42.8.1131 (application/pdf)

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:inm:ormnsc:v:42:y:1996:i:8:p:1131-1150

Access Statistics for this article

More articles in Management Science from INFORMS Contact information at EDIRC.
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Chris Asher ().