scholarly journals Expected Utility Theory for Monitoring-Based Decision-Making

2016 ◽  
Vol 104 (8) ◽  
pp. 1647-1661 ◽  
Author(s):  
Carlo Cappello ◽  
Daniele Zonta ◽  
Branko Glisic
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Expected Utility ◽  
Utility Theory ◽  
Expected Utility Theory

scholarly journals ECONOMICS OF RANDOMNESS: BEHAVIORAL ASPECTS OF DECISION MAKING UNDER RISK

2017 ◽  
Vol 9 (2) ◽  
pp. 7-14
Author(s):  
Alexander Krasilnikov
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Risk Analysis ◽  
Uncertainty Analysis ◽  
Expected Utility ◽  
Utility Theory ◽  
Expected Utility Theory ◽  
Probabilistic Methods ◽  
Risk And Uncertainty ◽  
Decision Making Under Risk ◽  
History Of

The paper discusses evolution of the concept of risk in economics. History of probabilistic methods and approaches to risk and uncertainty analysis is considered. Expected utility theory, behavioral approaches, heuristic models and methods of neuroeconomics are analyzed. Author investigates stability of neoclassical program related to risk analysis and suggests further directions of development.

Measuring Utility, Destabilizing EUT

2018 ◽  
pp. 261-280
Author(s):  
Ivan Moscati
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Behavioral Economics ◽  
Expected Utility ◽  
Utility Theory ◽  
Expected Utility Theory ◽  
Behavioral Models ◽  
Decision Making Under Risk ◽  
Utility Measurement ◽  
Elicitation Methods ◽  
Series Of Experiments

Chapter 16 shows how the validity of expected utility theory (EUT) was increasingly called into question between the mid-1960s and the mid-1970s and discusses how a series of experiments performed from 1974 to 1985 undermined the earlier confidence that EUT makes it possible to measure utility. Beginning in the mid-1960s, in a series of experiments seminal to the field later called behavioral economics, Sarah Lichtenstein, Paul Slovic, Amos Tversky, and others showed that decision patterns violating EUT are systematic. The new experimenters who engaged with the EUT-based measurement of utility from the mid-1970s, namely Uday Karmarkar, Richard de Neufville, Paul Schoemaker, and coauthors, showed that different elicitation methods to measure utility, which according to EUT should produce the same outcome, generate different measures. These findings contributed to destabilizing EUT, undermined the confidence in EUT-based utility measurement, and helped foster a blossoming of novel behavioral models of decision-making under risk.

scholarly journals Deal or No Deal? Decision Making under Risk in a Large-Payoff Game Show

2008 ◽  
Vol 98 (1) ◽  
pp. 38-71 ◽  
Author(s):  
Thierry Post ◽  
Martijn J van den Assem ◽  
Guido Baltussen ◽  
Richard H Thaler
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Risk Aversion ◽  
Prospect Theory ◽  
Expected Utility ◽  
Utility Theory ◽  
Path Dependence ◽  
Expected Utility Theory ◽  
Decision Making Under Risk ◽  
Game Show ◽  
Dependent Choice

We examine the risky choices of contestants in the popular TV game show “Deal or No Deal” and related classroom experiments. Contrary to the traditional view of expected utility theory, the choices can be explained in large part by previous outcomes experienced during the game. Risk aversion decreases after earlier expectations have been shattered by unfavorable outcomes or surpassed by favorable outcomes. Our results point to reference-dependent choice theories such as prospect theory, and suggest that path-dependence is relevant, even when the choice problems are simple and well defined, and when large real monetary amounts are at stake. (JEL D81)

scholarly journals Probability and Uncertainty in Economic Modeling

2009 ◽  
pp. 46-61
Author(s):  
I. Gilboa ◽  
W. A. Postlewaite ◽  
D. Schmeidler
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Probability Theory ◽  
Expected Utility ◽  
Subjective Probability ◽  
Utility Theory ◽  
Expected Utility Theory ◽  
Economic Modeling ◽  
New Approach ◽  
Multiple Priors

The article considers the paradigm of subjective probability and expected utility theory with respect to their applications in the theory of decision-making. Advantages and shortcomings of Savage’s axiomatic in the subjective probability theory are analyzed, the models of beliefs formation are considered. The authors propose a new approach to the analysis of decision-making — a multiple priors model, where an agent attributes to each event not a single probability, but a range of probabilities.

Adding Liver Stiffness Measurement to the Routine Evaluation of Hepatocellular Carcinoma Resectability Can Optimize Clinical Outcome

2016 ◽  
Vol 38 (05) ◽  
pp. 515-522
Author(s):  
Alessandro Cucchetti ◽  
Matteo Cescon ◽  
Antonio Colecchia ◽  
Flavia Neri ◽  
Alberta Cappelli ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Hepatocellular Carcinoma ◽  
Decision Making ◽  
Expected Utility ◽  
Clinical Judgment ◽  
Utility Theory ◽  
Liver Stiffness ◽  
Expected Utility Theory ◽  
Liver Stiffness Measurement ◽  
Decision Curve Analysis ◽  
Risk Seeking

Abstract Purpose Liver stiffness (LS) has been shown to be of use in chronic liver disease patients but its utility in surgical judgment still needs to be proven. A decision-making approach was applied to evaluate whether LS measurement before surgery of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) can be useful in avoiding post-hepatectomy liver failure (PHLF). Materials and Methods Decision curve analysis (DCA) was applied to 202 HCC patients (2008 – 14) with LS measurement prior to hepatectomy to verify whether the occurrence of PHLF grades B/C should be reduced through a decision-making approach with LS.  Results Within 90 days of surgery, 4 patients died (2 %) and grades B/C PHLF occurred in 29.7 % of cases. Ascites and/or pleural effusion, treatable with medical therapy, were the most frequent complications. DCA showed that using the “expected utility theory” LS measurement can reduce up to 39 % of cases of PHLF without the exclusion of any patient from surgery that duly undergoes an uncomplicated postoperative course. LS measurement does not add any information to normal clinical judgment for patients with a low (< 10 %) risk of PHLF. Conclusion LS measurement can determine a reduction of PHLF under “expected utility theory” fulfilment. However, the degree of PHLF can be minor and “risk seeking” individuals can accept such a risk on the basis of surgical benefits.

The Expected Utility Theory and Measurement Theory of von Neumann and Morgenstern, 1944–1947

2018 ◽  
pp. 147-162 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ivan Moscati
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Utility Function ◽  
Expected Utility ◽  
Utility Theory ◽  
Theory Of Measurement ◽  
Measurement Theory ◽  
Expected Utility Theory ◽  
Economic Behavior ◽  
Utility Analysis ◽  
Von Neumann

Chapter 9 discusses the axiomatic version of expected utility theory (EUT), a theory of decision-making under risk, put forward by John von Neumann and Oskar Morgenstern in their book Theory of Games and Economic Behavior (1944). EUT was a changing factor in the history of utility measurement. In fact, while discussions of the measurability of utility before 1944 focused on the utility used to analyze decision-making between risk-free alternatives, after that year, discussions centered on the utility used to analyze decision-making between risky alternatives. In Theory of Games, the nature of the cardinal utility function u featured in von Neumann and Morgenstern’s EUT, and its relationship with the riskless utility function U of previous utility analysis remained ambiguous. Von Neumann and Morgenstern also put forward an axiomatic theory of measurement, which presents some similarities with Stanley Smith Stevens’s measurement theory but had no immediate impact on utility analysis.

scholarly journals Farm decision making under risk and uncertainty

1997 ◽  
Vol 45 (2) ◽  
pp. 307-328 ◽  
Author(s):  
G.B.C. Backus ◽  
V.R. Eidman ◽  
A.A. Dijkhuizen
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Expected Utility ◽  
Utility Theory ◽  
Expected Utility Theory ◽  
Decision Problems ◽  
Subjective Expected Utility ◽  
Risk And Uncertainty ◽  
Decision Making Under Risk ◽  
Agricultural Risk ◽  
Risk Research

Relevant portions of the risk literature are reviewed, relating them to observed behaviour in farm decision-making. Relevant topics for applied agricultural risk research are proposed. The concept of decision making under risk and uncertainty is discussed by reviewing the theory of Subjective Expected Utility and its limitations. Subjective Expected Utility theory is the major framework for thinking systematically through complex issues of decision. Limitations of Subjective Expected Utility theory were that its application to unique decisions is doubtful, that it does not contribute to difficulties in determining the available decision alternatives, and that it is cast in a timeless setting, making the theoretic framework to a very limited extent helpful to solve real world decision problems. Most empirical studies indicate that farmers are risk neutral to slightly risk averse. It is doubtful whether decision makers could be classified according to their risk preferences. A presented overview of applied risk responses reveals much attention for diversification of the enterprise and of production practices, maintaining reserves, and farm expansion. Research reports on observed problems in farm decision making behaviour are lacking. Proposed topics for agricultural risk research include the assessment of the need for a strategic change, the creation of databases to determine both the (co)variances of input and output prices, the effectiveness of various kinds of decision support for different decision problems, and methods for applied scenario analysis to deal with long-run risk.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document