Abstract
Three reasons for why people may evaluate utility in a rank-dependent fashion have been suggested: (a) rank-dependent weighting is a function of perceptual biases and thus not prescriptively defensible; (b) weights are (re)distributed by motivational processes that reflect stable personality characteristics of the decision maker; and (c) weights are (re)distributed as a function of the situation, allowing rank-dependent evaluation to be a rational response to an environment with asymmetric loss functions. By modifying a study by Wakker, Erev, and Weber (1994) we show that all three processes - that is, perceptual biases, individual predispositions in weighting, as well as rational adaptation to an asymmetric loss function - can be involved in rank-dependent weighting.
| Original language | English (US) |
|---|---|
| Pages (from-to) | 41-61 |
| Number of pages | 21 |
| Journal | Journal of Risk and Uncertainty |
| Volume | 14 |
| Issue number | 1 |
| DOIs | |
| State | Published - 1997 |
All Science Journal Classification (ASJC) codes
- Accounting
- Finance
- Economics and Econometrics
Keywords
- Comonotonic independence
- Expected utility
- Independence
- Preference reversals
- Rank-dependent utility
Fingerprint
Dive into the research topics of 'Reasons for Rank-dependent Utility Evaluation'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.Cite this
- APA
- Author
- BIBTEX
- Harvard
- Standard
- RIS
- Vancouver