"Expected Utility" Analysis without the Independence Axiom "EXPECTED UTILITY" ANALYSIS WITHOUT THE INDEPENDENCE AXIOM' (original) (raw)
Related papers
An allais paradox for generalized expected utility theories
Economics Bulletin, 2008
This article reports the results of an experiment which aims at providing a test of ordinal independence, a necessary property of Generalized Expected Utility theories such as Rank-Dependent Expected Utility theory (RDEU). Our experiment is based on a modified version of the Allais paradox proposed by Machina, which allows testing ordinal independence restricted to simple lotteries, i.e. the tail-separability property. The results tend to support RDEU models since tail-separability is not violated by 71% of subjects while 73% violate the independence condition of classic Allais paradox. This confirms the relative theoritical soundness of RDEU models over Expected Utility model for the particular context of risk.
Risk, rationality and expected utility theory
Canadian Journal of Philosophy, 2015
There are decision problems where the preferences that seem rational to many people cannot be accommodated within orthodox decision theory in the natural way. In response, a number of alternatives to the orthodoxy have been proposed. In this paper, I offer an argument against those alternatives and in favour of the orthodoxy. I focus on preferences that seem to encode sensitivity to risk. And I focus on the alternative to the orthodoxy proposed by Lara Buchak’s risk-weighted expected utility theory. I will show that the orthodoxy can be made to accommodate all of the preferences that Buchak’s theory can accommodate.
Risk , uncertainty and the expected utility theory
2019
The present contribution examines the emergence of expected utility theory by John von Neumann and Oskar Morgenstern, the subjective the expected utility theory by Savage, and the problem of choice under risk and uncertainty, focusing in particular on the seminal work “The Utility Analysis of Choices involving Risk" (1948) by Milton Friedman and Leonard Savage to show how the evolution of the theory of choice has determined a separation of economics from psychology.
From Outcomes to Acts: A Non-Standard Axiomatization of the Expected Utility Principle
Journal of Philosophical Logic, 2004
This paper presents an axiomatization of the principle of maximizing expected utility that does not rely on the independence axiom or sure-thing principle. Perhaps more importantly the new axiomatization is based on an ex ante approach, instead of the standard ex post approach. An ex post approach utilizes the decision maker's preferences among risky acts for generating a utility and a probability function, whereas in the ex ante approach a set of preferences among potential outcomes are on the input side of the theory and the decision maker's preferences among risky acts on the output side.
Utilitarianism with and without expected utility
Journal of Mathematical Economics, 87 (2020) 77-113, 2020
We give two social aggregation theorems under conditions of risk, one for constant population cases, the other an extension to variable populations. Intra and interpersonal welfare comparisons are encoded in a single ‘individual preorder’. The theorems give axioms that uniquely determine a social preorder in terms of this individual preorder. The social preorders described by these theorems have features that may be considered characteristic of Harsanyi-style utilitarianism, such as indifference to ex ante and ex post equality. However, the theorems are also consistent with the rejection of all of the expected utility axioms, completeness, continuity, and independence, at both the individual and social levels. In that sense, expected utility is inessential to Harsanyi-style utilitarianism. In fact, the variable population theorem imposes only a mild constraint on the individual preorder, while the constant population theorem imposes no constraint at all. We then derive further results under the assumption of our basic axioms. First, the individual preorder satisfies the main expected utility axiom of strong independence if and only if the social preorder has a vector-valued expected total utility representation, covering Harsanyi’s utilitarian theorem as a special case. Second, stronger utilitarian-friendly assumptions, like Pareto or strong separability, are essentially equivalent to strong independence. Third, if the individual preorder satisfies a ‘local expected utility’ condition popular in non-expected utility theory, then the social preorder has a ‘local expected total utility’ representation. Fourth, a wide range of non-expected utility theories nevertheless lead to social preorders of outcomes that have been seen as canonically egalitarian, such as rank-dependent social preorders. Although our aggregation theorems are stated under conditions of risk, they are valid in more general frameworks for representing uncertainty or ambiguity.
Decision under Risk: The Classical Expected Utility Model
Decision-making Process, 2009
Ce chapitre d'ouvrage collectif a pour but de présenter les bases de la modélisation de la prise de décision dans un univers risqué. Nous commençons par dé…nir, de manière générale, la notion de risque et d'accroissement du risque et rappelons des dé…nitions et catégorisations (valables en dehors de tout modèle de représentation) de comportements face au risque. Nous exposons ensuite le modèle classique d'espérance d'utilité de von Neumann et Morgenstern et ses principales propriétés. Les problèmes posés par ce modèle sont ensuite discutés et deux modèles généralisant l'espérance d'utilité brièvement présentés. Mots clé: risque, aversion pour le risque, espérance d'utilité, von Neumann et Morgenstern, Paradoxe d'Allais. JEL: D81
2000
Expected utility theory does not directly deal with the utility of chance. It has been suggested in the literature ) that this can be remedied by an approach which explicitly models the emotional consequences which give rise to the utility of chance. We refer to this as the elaborated outcomes approach. It is argued that the elaborated outcomes approach destroys the possibility of deriving a representation theorem based on the usual axioms of expected utility theory. This is shown with the help of an example due to Markowitz. It turns out that the space of conceivable lotteries over elaborated outcomes is too narrow to permit the application of the axioms. Moreover it is shown that a representation theorem does not hold for the example.