Scholarlink

<p>We provide necessary and sufficient conditions for expected utility and risk-averse expected utility to rationalize behavior when the decision maker faces linear probability-prize tradeoffs. The setting subsumes those proposed in Andreoni and Harbaugh (Unexpected utility: Five experimental tests of preferences for risk, 2009)—risk-reward budgets—and Crosetto and Filippin (J Risk Uncertain 47(1):31–65, 2013)—bomb risk elicitation tasks. The tests are intuitive and straightforward to carry out. They also make it possible to compute the Houtman–Maks Index to measure how close the models come to explaining the choice sets, although we emphasize the limitations of these measures in this setting. We implement these results empirically and show that only small portions of choice sets can be rationalized by risk-averse expected utility.</p>

错误：搜索内容不能为空，请输入英文关键词
错误：关键词超出字数限制，请精简
高级检索

Revealed preference tests for linear probability-prize tradeoffs

  • 期刊论文

  • 出版模式：

    开放获取

  • 发表日期：

    2025年9月26日

查看全文
  • Zachary Breig,
  • Paul Feldman

摘要

We provide necessary and sufficient conditions for expected utility and risk-averse expected utility to rationalize behavior when the decision maker faces linear probability-prize tradeoffs. The setting subsumes those proposed in Andreoni and Harbaugh (Unexpected utility: Five experimental tests of preferences for risk, 2009)—risk-reward budgets—and Crosetto and Filippin (J Risk Uncertain 47(1):31–65, 2013)—bomb risk elicitation tasks. The tests are intuitive and straightforward to carry out. They also make it possible to compute the Houtman–Maks Index to measure how close the models come to explaining the choice sets, although we emphasize the limitations of these measures in this setting. We implement these results empirically and show that only small portions of choice sets can be rationalized by risk-averse expected utility.