Show simple item record

dc.contributor.authorAndreoni, James
dc.contributor.authorHarbaugh, William
dc.date.accessioned2011-02-28T23:16:45Z
dc.date.available2011-02-28T23:16:45Z
dc.date.issued2009-12
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/1794/11000
dc.description28 p.en_US
dc.description.abstractExperimental work on preferences over risk has typically considered choices over a small number of discrete options, some of which involve no risk. Such experiments often demonstrate contradictions of standard expected utility theory. We reconsider this literature with a new preference elicitation device that allows a continuous choice space over only risky options. Our analysis assumes only that preferences depend on the probability p and prize x; U = u(p; x): We then allow subjects to choose p and x continuously on a linear budget constraint, r1p + r2x = m, so that all prospects with a nonzero expected value are risky. We test five of the most importantly debated questions about risk preferences: rationality, prospect theory asymmetry, the independence axiom, probability weighting, and constant relative risk aversion. Overall, we find that the expected utility model does unexpectedly well.en_US
dc.language.isoen_USen_US
dc.publisherUniversity of Oregon, Dept of Economicsen_US
dc.relation.ispartofseriesUniversity of Oregon Economics Department Working Papers;2010-14
dc.titleUnexpected Utility: Experimental Tests of Five Key Questions about Preferences over Risken_US
dc.typeWorking Paperen_US


Files in this item

Thumbnail

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record