scholarly journals Utility Measurement in Integrative Negotiation

2021 ◽  
Vol 13 (1(I)) ◽  
pp. 1-15
Author(s):  
Latifa Ghalayini ◽  
Dana Deeb
Keyword(s):  
Incomplete Information ◽  
Function Structure ◽  
Competitive Position ◽  
Utility Measurement ◽  
Integrative Negotiation ◽  
Experienced Utility ◽  
Measurement Function ◽  
Decision Utility

This paper develops an adjustment to utility measurement in integrative negotiation where the negotiation information context is incomplete. The developed function reveals not only win-win outcomes but also deceptive practices where negotiators accept a win-lose deal and then compensate their loss in a deceptive way and greedy practices where negotiators realize their strong competitive position and try to extremely maximize their gains. However, to realize the objective, the utility measurement function literature and theories are reviewed to determine the relevant function structure and the necessary attributes that reveal the desired outcome in an incomplete information context. After examination, relationship measurement is added to the function under two utilities: Decision Utility and Experienced Utility. The foundation of the utility measurement function contributes to revealing satisfying win-win outcomes in an incomplete information negotiation context. Therefore, it develops the negotiation field by designing win-win deals that are beneficial and satisfying in which the advantage is distributed between the negotiators.

scholarly journals Happy with Your Capabilities? Valuing ICECAP-O and ICECAP-A States Based on Experienced Utility Using Subjective Well-Being Data

2020 ◽  
Vol 40 (4) ◽  
pp. 498-510
Author(s):  
Sebastian Himmler ◽  
Job van Exel ◽  
Werner Brouwer
Keyword(s):  
Regression Models ◽  
Well Being ◽  
Economic Evaluations ◽  
Subjective Well Being ◽  
Composite Measure ◽  
Target Groups ◽  
Cross Sectional ◽  
Experienced Utility ◽  
Decision Utility ◽  
Value Sets

Background. The ICECAP-O and the ICECAP-A are validated capability well-being instruments. To be used in economic evaluations, multidimensional instruments require weighting of the distinguished well-being states. These weights are usually obtained through ex ante preference elicitation (i.e., decision utility) but could also be based on experienced utility. Objective. This article describes the development of value sets for ICECAP-O and ICECAP-A based on experienced utility and compares them with current decision utility weights. Methods. Data from 2 cross-sectional samples corresponding to the target groups of ICECAP-O and ICECAP-A were used in 2 separate analyses. The utility impacts of ICECAP-O and ICECAP-A levels were assessed through regression models using a composite measure of subjective well-being as a proxy for experienced utility. The observed utility impacts were rescaled to match the 0 to 1 range of the existing value set. Results. The calculated experienced utility values were similar to the decision utility weights for some of the ICECAP dimensions but deviated for others. The largest differences were found for weights of the ICECAP-O dimension enjoyment and the ICECAP-A dimensions attachment and autonomy. Conclusions. The results suggest a different weighting of ICECAP-O and ICECAP-A levels if experienced utility is used instead of decision utility.

Experienced Utility or Decision Utility for QALY Calculation? Both

2017 ◽  
Vol 11 (1) ◽  
pp. 82-89
Author(s):  
Paige A Clayton ◽  
Douglas P MacKay
Keyword(s):  
Experienced Utility ◽  
Decision Utility

From Experienced Utility to Decision Utility

2014 ◽  
pp. 335-351 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kent C. Berridge ◽  
John P. O’Doherty
Keyword(s):  
Experienced Utility ◽  
Decision Utility

scholarly journals Travel mode choice and travel satisfaction: bridging the gap between decision utility and experienced utility

2015 ◽  
Vol 43 (5) ◽  
pp. 771-796 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jonas De Vos ◽  
Patricia L. Mokhtarian ◽  
Tim Schwanen ◽  
Veronique Van Acker ◽  
Frank Witlox
Keyword(s):  
Mode Choice ◽  
Travel Mode ◽  
Travel Mode Choice ◽  
Experienced Utility ◽  
Decision Utility ◽  
Travel Satisfaction

Epilogue

2018 ◽  
pp. 281-284
Author(s):  
Ivan Moscati
Keyword(s):  
Research Trend ◽  
Utility Model ◽  
Main Research ◽  
Utility Measurement ◽  
Research Programs ◽  
Rank Dependent Utility ◽  
Experienced Utility ◽  
History Of ◽  
Similarities And Differences ◽  
Future Work

The epilogue reviews the key passages in the history of economists’ ideas, discussions, and research on the measurability of utility between 1870 and 1985 and points to three main research programs related to utility measurement in the post-1985 period. Researchers in the first program, such as Peter Wakker and Mohammed Abdellaoui, aim at measuring utility experimentally on the basis of some nonexpected utility model, such as the rank-dependent utility model. A second research trend, championed by Daniel Kahneman, has been concerned with the measurement of utility-related concepts, such as “experienced utility,” “remembered utility,” or “happiness.” Finally, neuroeconomists such as Paul Glimcher have interpreted the measurement of the activity of a specific population of neurons in the human brain as the measurement of utility. The epilogue briefly discusses the similarities and differences between these three post-1985 research programs concerning utility measurement but leaves to future work a detailed analysis.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document