Economics at your fingertips  

Measuring Loss Aversion under Ambiguity: A Method to Make Prospect Theory Completely Observable

Mohammed Abdellaoui, Han Bleichrodt, Olivier L’haridon () and Dennie van Dolder
Additional contact information
Olivier L’haridon: GREGH - Groupement de Recherche et d'Etudes en Gestion à HEC - HEC Paris - Ecole des Hautes Etudes Commerciales - CNRS - Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique, CREM - Centre de recherche en économie et management - UNICAEN - Université de Caen Normandie - NU - Normandie Université - UR - Université de Rennes - CNRS - Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique

Authors registered in the RePEc Author Service: Olivier L'Haridon

Post-Print from HAL

Abstract: We propose a simple, parameter‐free method that, for the first time, makes it possible to completely observe Tversky and Kahneman's (1992) prospect theory. While methods existed to measure event weighting and the utility for gains and losses separately, there was no method to measure loss aversion under ambiguity. Our method allows this and thereby it can measure prospect theory's entire utility function. Consequently, we can properly identify properties of utility and perform new tests of prospect theory. We implemented our method in an experiment and obtained support for prospect theory. Utility was concave for gains and convex for losses and there was substantial loss aversion. Both utility and loss aversion were the same for risk and ambiguity, as assumed by prospect theory, and sign‐comonotonic trade‐off consistency, the central condition of prospect theory, held.

Keywords: elicitation methods; risk; ambiguity; prospect theory; loss aversion; utility for gains and losses (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Date: 2016
References: Add references at CitEc
Citations: View citations in EconPapers (31)

Published in Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, 2016, 52 (1), pp.1-20. ⟨10.1007/s11166-016-9234-y⟩

There are no downloads for this item, see the EconPapers FAQ for hints about obtaining it.

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:

DOI: 10.1007/s11166-016-9234-y

Access Statistics for this paper

More papers in Post-Print from HAL
Bibliographic data for series maintained by CCSD ().

Page updated 2024-07-01
Handle: RePEc:hal:journl:halshs-01242616