Summer 2003 (420 2)
|
|
- Aubrie Baker
- 5 years ago
- Views:
Transcription
1 Microeconomics 3 Andreas Ortmann, Ph.D. Summer 2003 (420 2) andreas.ortmann@cerge-ei.cz Week of May 12, lecture 3: Expected utility theory, continued: Risk aversion Key reading: MWG 6C Supplementary sources: Binmore (1992), Kreps (1990) Assignments: [for May 20] MWG 6D [for May 20] Problem set # 2 ~ downloadable Wednesday noon from home.cergeei.cz/babicky/micro3. There you will also find Thursday afternoon the lecture notes for the week. [for May 20] Brown Kruse and Thompson (2001), A comparison of salient rewards in experiments: money and class points. Economics Letters 74, [for May 20] Holt and Laury (2002), Risk Aversion and Incentive Effects. American Economic Review 92, [for May 20] Harrison, Johnson, McInnes, and Rutstroem (2003), Risk Aversion and Incentive Effects: Comment. Manuscript. [for May 20] Berg, Dickhaut, and Rietz (1999), On the performance of the Lottery Procedure for Controlling Risk Preferences. Manuscript. [for May 22] 6.E., 6.F. [for May 22] Starmer (2000), Developments in Non-Expected Utility Theory: The Hunt for a Descriptive Theory of Choice under Risk. Journal of Economic Literature 38, [leisure reading] Hertwig and Ortmann (2001), Experimental practices in economics: A methodological challenge for psychologists? Behavioral and Brain Sciences 24, [Includes commentaries of 34 economists and psychologists and our response to them.] New articles to write four-page paper on: Bellemare and Kroeger (2003), On Representative Trust. Manuscript. Brandts and Charness (2003), Truth or Consequences: An experiment. Management Science, 49.1.,
2 2 [soon on reserve] [Commandments for 4-page paper, see on my website the course materials section.] Guiding questions for Cox & Grether (1996), The preference reversal phenomenon: Response mode, markets and incentives. 1. What is the preference reversal phenomenon (PRP from here on)? What two kinds of bets does it involve? The lotteries or lotteries or bets involved are the P bet and the $ bet. The P-bet is a gamble that has a high probability of winning a small amount of money. The $ bet is a gamble that has a low probability of winning a large amount of money. Subjects are asked to choose between the two gambles (and they typically end up choosing the P bet). Subjects are also asked to through various modes of elicitation such as the BDM method to place monetary values on the two bets (and they typically end up putting the higher value on the$ bet).. 2. What is a predicted reversal as opposed to an unpredicted reversal? [Hint: See pp. 382, 386] A predicted reversal occurs if subjects select the P bet but place a higher monetary value on the $ bet. See p. 386 for the (two) pairs of gambles used in this study. Note that that s not many. You can think of this as a framing effect. 3. What puzzle motivates Cox & Grether to study this phenomenon? [Hint: p. 382] What puzzles them is that while individual choice behavior seems often as in the case of PRP inconsistent with EUT in ways that are systematic and replicable, in market experiments behavior typically seems in line with predictions derived from models that often are based on EUT (e.g., auctions - see the Gode and Sunder reference ) even if financial incentives are low-powered. 4. What could be the reason for this curious and somewhat disturbing discrepancy (that robust observations of deviations from the benchmark EUT model are not robust in market experiments)? What do Cox & Grether find? [Hint: See pp and summary and conclusions.] Feedback, repetition, psychologically different tasks, institutions, information, economic incentives. Response mode. 5. What does the response mode in the title of the Cox & Grether piece refer to? How does the nonmarket choice task work? How does the BDM procedure differ from the one that I used to elicit your risk preference in decision task 1 on decision questionnaire 1? [Hint: See pp ] How do the auctions work that Cox & Grether employ? And what exactly is their function? To the various nonmarket (choosing most preferred item from each of three pairs... ; BDM
3 procedure) and market (English clock auction; second price sealed bid auction) choice and pricing tasks, respectively, that Cox & Grether used. The nonmarket choice task consisted of subjects having to choose the most preferred from each of three pairs: {P bet, $ bet}, {P bet, $ X}, {$ bet, $X} where $X was set equal to the midpoint of the certainty equivalents which themselves were elicited through BDM mechanism and the two auctions. BDM procedure - subjects were given the right to play a gamble and asked to state their minimum selling price. Random prices were determined by drawing balls from a bingo cage. (Why is that procedure incentive compatible?) The BDM procedure is finer tuned in that it allows to compute the degree of risk aversion. Of course, one could construct series of gambles as Holt & Laury did and get a similar result. Auctions - questions? Note that while both auctions are market mechanisms, the response mode in the clock auction consists of choices (because each subject must decide whether to choose to play the bet or to stay in the auction), whereas the response mode in the sealed bid auction consists of stating prices. 6. What does the incentives reference in the title of the Cox and Grether piece refer to? What curious problem did arise initially? The three levels of subject payments: full, diluted, and flat fee. See p. 387, see also p. 392 about what went wrong initially with the third payment mode. 7. Looking at Table 1 (p. 388):.1.Compare the PRs for BDM1, CR1, CR.5, and CR0. What do you note?.2. Compare the PRs for BDM5, CR1, CR.5, and CR0. What do you note?.3. Compare your preceding two observations. What do you note?.4. Now compare the PRs for SPA1, CR1, CR.5, and CR0. What do you note?.5. Now compare the PRs for SPA5, CR1, CR.5, and CR0. What do you note?.6. Compare your preceding two observations. What do you note?.7. Finally, compare the PRs for ECA1, CR1, CR.5, and CR0. What do you note?.8. Finally, compare the PRs for ECA5, CR1, CR.5, and CR0. What do you note?.9. Compare your preceding two observations. What do you note?.10. Under what conditions is the effect of high-powered incentives the largest? 8. What are the key insights to take from this paper? Response mode matters. Markets (repetition and feedback matters!) Incentives matter. But they don t always matter in straightforward and simple ways. Specifically, (Asymmetric!) PRP was observed consistently in all response modes on the first repetition, even in a market setting (second price auction) with immediate feedback, both with and without financial incentives (confirming earlier experimental results, especially those for 3
4 4 other response modes such as BDM mechanism). After five repetitions of the auction, the subjects bids were generally consistent with their choices the number of PRs clearly went down and the asymmetry between the rates of predicted and unpredicted reversals had disappeared. Same for BDM mechanism. The repetitive nature of the tasks in conjunction with feedback is an important factor. Monetary incentives played less of a role than is typically assumed. The results presented in this paper support the view that the nature of the market institutions and the information generated by the markets, together with the feedback and the repetitive nature of market tasks, account for the generally positive results of market experiments. (p. 403)
5 Note 1: Assume that lotteries have prizes (i.e., monetary outcomes) that are continuous. Denote prizes by the continuous variable x. Define the cumulative distribution function F = F(x) = I f(t)dt for all x: œ -> [0,1] is the probability that the realized payoff is less than or equal to x. (MWG take the space of all lotteries to be the set of all distribution functions over nonnegative amounts of money. This is obviously just for pedagogical reasons. Introduction of negative amounts of money creates interesting problems though empirically and theoretically: -> prospect theory. Note 2: We work with distribution function because they make life easier (e.g., allow us a general formulation for discrete and continuous outcomes) Note 3: F preserves the linear structure of lotteries: the distribution of final prizes induced by the compound lottery (L 1,..., L K ; " 1,..., " K ) is F(x) = 3 k " k F k (x). Note 4: The extension of the expected utility theorem to the continuous case is straightforward: The VNM utility function becomes U(F) = I u(x) df(x) = I u(x) f(x) dx where u(x) is the assignment of utility values to monetary outcomes. Obviously U(F) is the mathematical expectation, over the realizations of x, of the values of u(x). Abusing notation, u(x) corresponds to u(x i ) and f(x) corresponds to p(x i ) in the discrete case. U is linear in F as U was linear in p. Note 5: MWG call U(@) the VNM expected utility function (which is defined over lotteries); they call u(@) the Bernoulli utility function (which is defined over sure amounts of money). In the current context u(@) is assumed to be increasing and continuous. Note 6: (St. Petersburg paradox) Are there any restrictions on utility functions? Here s a classic example that shows that there has to be some boundedness. Consider the lottery that pays you $2 k if on the kth trial (of tossing a fair coin repeatedly) heads shows up for the first time. How much would you be willing to pay for that lottery? Assume that each toss of the coin is independent. Then the prob of H happening on the first trial is prob(h) = 1/2, the prob of H happening on the second trial is prob(th) = 1/4, and so on. The expectation in dollars of that lottery is hence E(L) = $2 prob(h) + $4 prob(th) +... = $2x1/2 + $4x1/ = $1 + $ But this means that the expected dollar value of the lottery is.... How much would you offer? Should you be willing to liquidate your entire worldly wealth in order to buy a ticket to participate in the lottery? [Discussed in class] 5
6 Definition 6.C.1 (Risk preferences, without presuming expected utility formulation): A decision maker is a risk averter if for any lottery F(@) the degenerate lottery that yields the amount I x df(x) with certainty is at least as good as the lottery F(@) itself. If the decision maker is always [i.e., for any F(@)] indifferent between these two lotteries, we say that he or she is risk neutral. Finally, we say that he is strictly risk averse if indifference holds only when the two lotteries are the same [i.e., when F(@) is degenerate]. Note 0: This sounds at first very confusing... but isn t really. It s just a fancy way of formalizing decision problem 1 on decision questionnaire 1. Note 1: First interpretation of risk aversion: The decision maker is risk averse if and only if I u(x) df(x) # u(i x df(x)) for all F(@) if preferences admit an expected utility representation with Bernoulli utility function. I.e., a decision maker is risk averse if and only if her or his Bernoulli utility function is concave. Strict concavity describes strict risk aversion. Equality reflects risk neutrality. [Discussion Figure 6.C.2(a)(b)] Note 2: Second interpretation of risk aversion: Strict concavity means that MU of money is decreasing. Hence, at any level of wealth of x, the utility gain from an extra dollar is smaller than (the absolute value of) the utility of having a dollar less. [Discussion Figure 6.C.2 (a)(b)] Note 3: Third and fourth interpretation of risk aversion: Definition 6.C.2 (certainty equivalent, probability premium): Given a Bernoulli utility function u(@), (i) the certainty equivalent of F(@), denoted c(f,u), is the amount of money for which the individual is indifferent between the gamble F(@) and the certain amount c(f,u); that is, u(c(f,u)) = Iu( x) df(x). (ii) for any fixed amount of money x and positive number,, the probability premium denoted by B(x,,,u), is the excess of the winning probability over fair odds that makes the individual indifferent between the certain outcome x and a gamble between the two outcomes x+, and x-,. That is u(x) = (1/2 + B(x,,,u))u(x+,) + (1/2 - B(x,,,u))u(x-,) [Discussion Figure 6.C.3 (a)(b)] Note 0: The terminology here can be confusing. E.g., Hey (1979), as does much of the preceding literature and also later literature (e.g., Kreps 1990, pp. 84-5), talks of risk premium to describe the wealth that an individual is willing to forgo so as to change a risky gamble into a certain one. That is, in other words, the difference between the expected value and the certainty equivalent. Note 1: The risk premium quantifies the trade-off between return and certainty (risk) that a 6
7 decision maker is willing to undergo. Similarly, the probability premium quantifies the odds that a decision maker requires to accept the trade-off between return and certainty (risk). The probability premium is the upward probability shift that induces a risk averse decision maker to trade in a sure payoff for a gamble. Note 2: A positive risk premium can only exist if the decision maker is risk averse; similarly, a positive probability premium can only exist if the decision maker is risk averse. Note 3: It s straightforward to extent the above definitions and concepts to risk proness or risk love. E.g., the decision maker is prone to risk or risk loving if and only if I u(x) df(x) $ u(i x df(x)) for all F(@) if preferences admit an expected utility representation with Bernoulli utility function. I.e., a decision maker is prone to risk or risk loving if and only if her or his Bernoulli utility function is convex. Strict convexity describes strict risk proneness or strict risk love. Or, strict convexity means that MU of money is increasing. Hence, at any level of wealth of x, the utility gain from an extra dollar is greater than (the absolute value of) the utility of having a dollar less. See Fig 6.C.2 (c). And so on. It is useful (and straightforward) to think through the consequences of these definitions for risk premia and probability premia. So, please do. Note 4: The tradeoff between return and risk (and the importance of the impact of risk preferences) is at the heart of portfolio allocation and insurance problems. Proposition 6.C.1. (Equivalency of statements): Suppose a decision maker is an expected utility maximizer with a Bernoulli u(@) on amounts of money. Then the following properties are equivalent. (i) The decision maker is risk averse. (ii) u(@) is concave. (iii) c(f,u)) # I x df(x) for all F(@) (iv) B(x,,,u) $ 0 for all x, [Make sure you understand the little proof of why (iii) is equivalent to (i). Discussed in class] 7
8 8 Note 5: Two well-known measures of risk aversion are Definition 6.C.3 (r A (x)): Given a (twice differentiable) Bernoulli function u(@) for money, the coefficient of absolute risk aversion at x (Arrow-Pratt measure) is defined as r A (x) = - u (x)/u (x). Definition 6.C.3 (r R (x)): Given a (twice differentiable) Bernoulli function u(@) for money, the coefficient of relative risk aversion at x is defined as r R (x) = - xu (x)/u (x). Note 5.1: The difference between the two measures of risk is obvious: they are identical except for the weighting with x. So, r R (x,u) = x r A (x,u). Note 5.2: Both measures exploit the curvature of the Bernoulli utility function and the fact that certainty equivalent (risk premium) and probability premium are intimately tied to the curvature. Since the Bernoulli utility function is only quasi-cardinal, and hence can be changed by way of affine transformation, the second derivative in the numerator is normalized through the first derivative in the denominator. Note 5.3: Differentiating u(x) = (1/2 + B(x,,,u))u(x+,) + (1/2 - B(x,,,u))u(x-,) with respect to, and evaluating at, = 0, we get 4 B (0)u (x) + u (x) = 0. Hence, r A (x) = 4 B (0). Thus, r A (x) measures the rate at which the probability premium increases at certainty with the small risk measured by,.
9 9 [Decision questionnaire 2] Your name:... class point option I prefer the [Circle your choice!] money option This is an experiment in the economics of decision making. If you follow the instructions carefully you can win a significant chance to make either money or earn class points. You are endowed with 2,400 lab dollars and you face a 1 in 6 chance of losing 1,200. You must decide whether you would choose a protective measure or not. If you purchase a protective measure the probability that you will lose the 1,200 drops to 1 in 36. There are six situations: A through F. They are listed below. Each of these situations gives a price for a protective measure and asks you to check YES or NO to buying the protective measure. Once everyone is finished, I will have someone draw a letter (A through F) and roll the dice to determine if the loss case will come up. (The loss case will come up if in case you bought protection rolling a dice twice comes up with a 1" twice, or if in case you did not rolling a dice comes up with a 1".) I will convert the lab dollar balances of three randomly drawn participants to Czech korunas at the rate of 400 lab dollars = 200 korunas or 400 lab dollars = 1 percentage point added to your total grade at the end of the course. => Please decide now if you prefer the class point or the money option. Circle you choice at the top of the page. => Now decide which of the protective measures you want to buy: Situation Price of Protective Measure Buy? Circle YES or NO A 200 lab dollars YES NO B 400 lab dollars YES NO C 600 lab dollars YES NO D 800 lab dollars YES NO E 1,000 lab dollars YES NO F 1,200 lab dollars YES NO
10 10
Comparison of Payoff Distributions in Terms of Return and Risk
Comparison of Payoff Distributions in Terms of Return and Risk Preliminaries We treat, for convenience, money as a continuous variable when dealing with monetary outcomes. Strictly speaking, the derivation
More informationMICROECONOMIC THEROY CONSUMER THEORY
LECTURE 5 MICROECONOMIC THEROY CONSUMER THEORY Choice under Uncertainty (MWG chapter 6, sections A-C, and Cowell chapter 8) Lecturer: Andreas Papandreou 1 Introduction p Contents n Expected utility theory
More informationChoice under risk and uncertainty
Choice under risk and uncertainty Introduction Up until now, we have thought of the objects that our decision makers are choosing as being physical items However, we can also think of cases where the outcomes
More informationOutline. Simple, Compound, and Reduced Lotteries Independence Axiom Expected Utility Theory Money Lotteries Risk Aversion
Uncertainty Outline Simple, Compound, and Reduced Lotteries Independence Axiom Expected Utility Theory Money Lotteries Risk Aversion 2 Simple Lotteries 3 Simple Lotteries Advanced Microeconomic Theory
More informationOn the Performance of the Lottery Procedure for Controlling Risk Preferences *
On the Performance of the Lottery Procedure for Controlling Risk Preferences * By Joyce E. Berg ** John W. Dickhaut *** And Thomas A. Rietz ** July 1999 * We thank James Cox, Glenn Harrison, Vernon Smith
More informationAdvanced Risk Management
Winter 2014/2015 Advanced Risk Management Part I: Decision Theory and Risk Management Motives Lecture 1: Introduction and Expected Utility Your Instructors for Part I: Prof. Dr. Andreas Richter Email:
More informationPh.D. Preliminary Examination MICROECONOMIC THEORY Applied Economics Graduate Program June 2017
Ph.D. Preliminary Examination MICROECONOMIC THEORY Applied Economics Graduate Program June 2017 The time limit for this exam is four hours. The exam has four sections. Each section includes two questions.
More informationRational theories of finance tell us how people should behave and often do not reflect reality.
FINC3023 Behavioral Finance TOPIC 1: Expected Utility Rational theories of finance tell us how people should behave and often do not reflect reality. A normative theory based on rational utility maximizers
More informationChoice under Uncertainty
Chapter 7 Choice under Uncertainty 1. Expected Utility Theory. 2. Risk Aversion. 3. Applications: demand for insurance, portfolio choice 4. Violations of Expected Utility Theory. 7.1 Expected Utility Theory
More informationBEEM109 Experimental Economics and Finance
University of Exeter Recap Last class we looked at the axioms of expected utility, which defined a rational agent as proposed by von Neumann and Morgenstern. We then proceeded to look at empirical evidence
More informationMicroeconomic Theory III Spring 2009
MIT OpenCourseWare http://ocw.mit.edu 14.123 Microeconomic Theory III Spring 2009 For information about citing these materials or our Terms of Use, visit: http://ocw.mit.edu/terms. MIT 14.123 (2009) by
More informationMicro Theory I Assignment #5 - Answer key
Micro Theory I Assignment #5 - Answer key 1. Exercises from MWG (Chapter 6): (a) Exercise 6.B.1 from MWG: Show that if the preferences % over L satisfy the independence axiom, then for all 2 (0; 1) and
More informationCHOICE THEORY, UTILITY FUNCTIONS AND RISK AVERSION
CHOICE THEORY, UTILITY FUNCTIONS AND RISK AVERSION Szabolcs Sebestyén szabolcs.sebestyen@iscte.pt Master in Finance INVESTMENTS Sebestyén (ISCTE-IUL) Choice Theory Investments 1 / 65 Outline 1 An Introduction
More informationPreference Reversals and Induced Risk Preferences: Evidence for Noisy Maximization
The Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, 27:2; 139 170, 2003 c 2003 Kluwer Academic Publishers. Manufactured in The Netherlands. Preference Reversals and Induced Risk Preferences: Evidence for Noisy Maximization
More informationChapter 6: Risky Securities and Utility Theory
Chapter 6: Risky Securities and Utility Theory Topics 1. Principle of Expected Return 2. St. Petersburg Paradox 3. Utility Theory 4. Principle of Expected Utility 5. The Certainty Equivalent 6. Utility
More informationLecture 3: Prospect Theory, Framing, and Mental Accounting. Expected Utility Theory. The key features are as follows:
Topics Lecture 3: Prospect Theory, Framing, and Mental Accounting Expected Utility Theory Violations of EUT Prospect Theory Framing Mental Accounting Application of Prospect Theory, Framing, and Mental
More informationComparative Risk Sensitivity with Reference-Dependent Preferences
The Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, 24:2; 131 142, 2002 2002 Kluwer Academic Publishers. Manufactured in The Netherlands. Comparative Risk Sensitivity with Reference-Dependent Preferences WILLIAM S. NEILSON
More informationDiminishing Preference Reversals by Inducing Risk Preferences
Diminishing Preference Reversals by Inducing Risk Preferences By Joyce E. Berg Department of Accounting Henry B. Tippie College of Business University of Iowa Iowa City, Iowa 52242 John W. Dickhaut Department
More informationECON 581. Decision making under risk. Instructor: Dmytro Hryshko
ECON 581. Decision making under risk Instructor: Dmytro Hryshko 1 / 36 Outline Expected utility Risk aversion Certainty equivalence and risk premium The canonical portfolio allocation problem 2 / 36 Suggested
More informationExpected utility theory; Expected Utility Theory; risk aversion and utility functions
; Expected Utility Theory; risk aversion and utility functions Prof. Massimo Guidolin Portfolio Management Spring 2016 Outline and objectives Utility functions The expected utility theorem and the axioms
More informationPayoff Scale Effects and Risk Preference Under Real and Hypothetical Conditions
Payoff Scale Effects and Risk Preference Under Real and Hypothetical Conditions Susan K. Laury and Charles A. Holt Prepared for the Handbook of Experimental Economics Results February 2002 I. Introduction
More informationECON Financial Economics
ECON 8 - Financial Economics Michael Bar August, 0 San Francisco State University, department of economics. ii Contents Decision Theory under Uncertainty. Introduction.....................................
More informationPh.D. Preliminary Examination MICROECONOMIC THEORY Applied Economics Graduate Program August 2017
Ph.D. Preliminary Examination MICROECONOMIC THEORY Applied Economics Graduate Program August 2017 The time limit for this exam is four hours. The exam has four sections. Each section includes two questions.
More informationModels & Decision with Financial Applications Unit 3: Utility Function and Risk Attitude
Models & Decision with Financial Applications Unit 3: Utility Function and Risk Attitude Duan LI Department of Systems Engineering & Engineering Management The Chinese University of Hong Kong http://www.se.cuhk.edu.hk/
More informationModels and Decision with Financial Applications UNIT 1: Elements of Decision under Uncertainty
Models and Decision with Financial Applications UNIT 1: Elements of Decision under Uncertainty We always need to make a decision (or select from among actions, options or moves) even when there exists
More informationA NOTE ON SANDRONI-SHMAYA BELIEF ELICITATION MECHANISM
The Journal of Prediction Markets 2016 Vol 10 No 2 pp 14-21 ABSTRACT A NOTE ON SANDRONI-SHMAYA BELIEF ELICITATION MECHANISM Arthur Carvalho Farmer School of Business, Miami University Oxford, OH, USA,
More informationExpected Utility And Risk Aversion
Expected Utility And Risk Aversion Econ 2100 Fall 2017 Lecture 12, October 4 Outline 1 Risk Aversion 2 Certainty Equivalent 3 Risk Premium 4 Relative Risk Aversion 5 Stochastic Dominance Notation From
More informationManagerial Economics
Managerial Economics Unit 9: Risk Analysis Rudolf Winter-Ebmer Johannes Kepler University Linz Winter Term 2015 Managerial Economics: Unit 9 - Risk Analysis 1 / 49 Objectives Explain how managers should
More informationLecture 11: Critiques of Expected Utility
Lecture 11: Critiques of Expected Utility Alexander Wolitzky MIT 14.121 1 Expected Utility and Its Discontents Expected utility (EU) is the workhorse model of choice under uncertainty. From very early
More informationModule 1: Decision Making Under Uncertainty
Module 1: Decision Making Under Uncertainty Information Economics (Ec 515) George Georgiadis Today, we will study settings in which decision makers face uncertain outcomes. Natural when dealing with asymmetric
More informationAnswers to chapter 3 review questions
Answers to chapter 3 review questions 3.1 Explain why the indifference curves in a probability triangle diagram are straight lines if preferences satisfy expected utility theory. The expected utility of
More informationChapter 23: Choice under Risk
Chapter 23: Choice under Risk 23.1: Introduction We consider in this chapter optimal behaviour in conditions of risk. By this we mean that, when the individual takes a decision, he or she does not know
More informationOn the Empirical Relevance of St. Petersburg Lotteries. James C. Cox, Vjollca Sadiraj, and Bodo Vogt
On the Empirical Relevance of St. Petersburg Lotteries James C. Cox, Vjollca Sadiraj, and Bodo Vogt Experimental Economics Center Working Paper 2008-05 Georgia State University On the Empirical Relevance
More informationExercises for Chapter 8
Exercises for Chapter 8 Exercise 8. Consider the following functions: f (x)= e x, (8.) g(x)=ln(x+), (8.2) h(x)= x 2, (8.3) u(x)= x 2, (8.4) v(x)= x, (8.5) w(x)=sin(x). (8.6) In all cases take x>0. (a)
More informationWe examine the impact of risk aversion on bidding behavior in first-price auctions.
Risk Aversion We examine the impact of risk aversion on bidding behavior in first-price auctions. Assume there is no entry fee or reserve. Note: Risk aversion does not affect bidding in SPA because there,
More informationHANDBOOK OF EXPERIMENTAL ECONOMICS RESULTS
HANDBOOK OF EXPERIMENTAL ECONOMICS RESULTS Edited by CHARLES R. PLOTT California Institute of Technology and VERNON L. SMITH Chapman University NORTH-HOLLAND AMSTERDAM NEW YORK OXFORD TOKYO North-Holland
More informationExpected value is basically the average payoff from some sort of lottery, gamble or other situation with a randomly determined outcome.
Economics 352: Intermediate Microeconomics Notes and Sample Questions Chapter 18: Uncertainty and Risk Aversion Expected Value The chapter starts out by explaining what expected value is and how to calculate
More informationIf U is linear, then U[E(Ỹ )] = E[U(Ỹ )], and one is indifferent between lottery and its expectation. One is called risk neutral.
Risk aversion For those preference orderings which (i.e., for those individuals who) satisfy the seven axioms, define risk aversion. Compare a lottery Ỹ = L(a, b, π) (where a, b are fixed monetary outcomes)
More informationPh.D. Preliminary Examination MICROECONOMIC THEORY Applied Economics Graduate Program June 2015
Ph.D. Preliminary Examination MICROECONOMIC THEORY Applied Economics Graduate Program June 2015 The time limit for this exam is four hours. The exam has four sections. Each section includes two questions.
More informationMicroeconomic Theory III Spring 2009
MIT OpenCourseWare http://ocw.mit.edu 14.123 Microeconomic Theory III Spring 2009 For information about citing these materials or our Terms of Use, visit: http://ocw.mit.edu/terms. MIT 14.123 (2009) by
More informationUTILITY ANALYSIS HANDOUTS
UTILITY ANALYSIS HANDOUTS 1 2 UTILITY ANALYSIS Motivating Example: Your total net worth = $400K = W 0. You own a home worth $250K. Probability of a fire each yr = 0.001. Insurance cost = $1K. Question:
More informationGame Theory. Lecture Notes By Y. Narahari. Department of Computer Science and Automation Indian Institute of Science Bangalore, India July 2012
Game Theory Lecture Notes By Y. Narahari Department of Computer Science and Automation Indian Institute of Science Bangalore, India July 2012 The Revenue Equivalence Theorem Note: This is a only a draft
More informationChapter 18: Risky Choice and Risk
Chapter 18: Risky Choice and Risk Risky Choice Probability States of Nature Expected Utility Function Interval Measure Violations Risk Preference State Dependent Utility Risk-Aversion Coefficient Actuarially
More informationRisk aversion and choice under uncertainty
Risk aversion and choice under uncertainty Pierre Chaigneau pierre.chaigneau@hec.ca June 14, 2011 Finance: the economics of risk and uncertainty In financial markets, claims associated with random future
More informationKIER DISCUSSION PAPER SERIES
KIER DISCUSSION PAPER SERIES KYOTO INSTITUTE OF ECONOMIC RESEARCH http://www.kier.kyoto-u.ac.jp/index.html Discussion Paper No. 657 The Buy Price in Auctions with Discrete Type Distributions Yusuke Inami
More informationLecture 6 Introduction to Utility Theory under Certainty and Uncertainty
Lecture 6 Introduction to Utility Theory under Certainty and Uncertainty Prof. Massimo Guidolin Prep Course in Quant Methods for Finance August-September 2017 Outline and objectives Axioms of choice under
More informationNotes 10: Risk and Uncertainty
Economics 335 April 19, 1999 A. Introduction Notes 10: Risk and Uncertainty 1. Basic Types of Uncertainty in Agriculture a. production b. prices 2. Examples of Uncertainty in Agriculture a. crop yields
More informationLecture 3: Utility-Based Portfolio Choice
Lecture 3: Utility-Based Portfolio Choice Prof. Massimo Guidolin Portfolio Management Spring 2017 Outline and objectives Choice under uncertainty: dominance o Guidolin-Pedio, chapter 1, sec. 2 Choice under
More informationCasino gambling problem under probability weighting
Casino gambling problem under probability weighting Sang Hu National University of Singapore Mathematical Finance Colloquium University of Southern California Jan 25, 2016 Based on joint work with Xue
More information1. A is a decision support tool that uses a tree-like graph or model of decisions and their possible consequences, including chance event outcomes,
1. A is a decision support tool that uses a tree-like graph or model of decisions and their possible consequences, including chance event outcomes, resource costs, and utility. A) Decision tree B) Graphs
More informationMeasuring and Utilizing Corporate Risk Tolerance to Improve Investment Decision Making
Measuring and Utilizing Corporate Risk Tolerance to Improve Investment Decision Making Michael R. Walls Division of Economics and Business Colorado School of Mines mwalls@mines.edu January 1, 2005 (Under
More informationCopyright (C) 2001 David K. Levine This document is an open textbook; you can redistribute it and/or modify it under the terms of version 1 of the
Copyright (C) 2001 David K. Levine This document is an open textbook; you can redistribute it and/or modify it under the terms of version 1 of the open text license amendment to version 2 of the GNU General
More informationRandom Variables and Applications OPRE 6301
Random Variables and Applications OPRE 6301 Random Variables... As noted earlier, variability is omnipresent in the business world. To model variability probabilistically, we need the concept of a random
More informationBehavioral Economics (Lecture 1)
14.127 Behavioral Economics (Lecture 1) Xavier Gabaix February 5, 2003 1 Overview Instructor: Xavier Gabaix Time 4-6:45/7pm, with 10 minute break. Requirements: 3 problem sets and Term paper due September
More informationUnit 4.3: Uncertainty
Unit 4.: Uncertainty Michael Malcolm June 8, 20 Up until now, we have been considering consumer choice problems where the consumer chooses over outcomes that are known. However, many choices in economics
More informationCONVENTIONAL FINANCE, PROSPECT THEORY, AND MARKET EFFICIENCY
CONVENTIONAL FINANCE, PROSPECT THEORY, AND MARKET EFFICIENCY PART ± I CHAPTER 1 CHAPTER 2 CHAPTER 3 Foundations of Finance I: Expected Utility Theory Foundations of Finance II: Asset Pricing, Market Efficiency,
More informationMicroeconomics (Uncertainty & Behavioural Economics, Ch 05)
Microeconomics (Uncertainty & Behavioural Economics, Ch 05) Lecture 23 Apr 10, 2017 Uncertainty and Consumer Behavior To examine the ways that people can compare and choose among risky alternatives, we
More informationLecture 11 - Risk Aversion, Expected Utility Theory and Insurance
Lecture 11 - Risk Aversion, Expected Utility Theory and Insurance 14.03, Spring 2003 1 Risk Aversion and Insurance: Introduction To have a passably usable model of choice, we need to be able to say something
More informationECON4510 Finance Theory Lecture 1
ECON4510 Finance Theory Lecture 1 Kjetil Storesletten Department of Economics University of Oslo 15 January 2018 Kjetil Storesletten, Dept. of Economics, UiO ECON4510 Finance Theory Lecture 1 15 January
More informationIntroduction. Two main characteristics: Editing Evaluation. The use of an editing phase Outcomes as difference respect to a reference point 2
Prospect theory 1 Introduction Kahneman and Tversky (1979) Kahneman and Tversky (1992) cumulative prospect theory It is classified as nonconventional theory It is perhaps the most well-known of alternative
More informationMA 1125 Lecture 14 - Expected Values. Wednesday, October 4, Objectives: Introduce expected values.
MA 5 Lecture 4 - Expected Values Wednesday, October 4, 27 Objectives: Introduce expected values.. Means, Variances, and Standard Deviations of Probability Distributions Two classes ago, we computed the
More informationLecture 06 Single Attribute Utility Theory
Lecture 06 Single Attribute Utility Theory Jitesh H. Panchal ME 597: Decision Making for Engineering Systems Design Design Engineering Lab @ Purdue (DELP) School of Mechanical Engineering Purdue University,
More informationExpected Utility and Risk Aversion
Expected Utility and Risk Aversion Expected utility and risk aversion 1/ 58 Introduction Expected utility is the standard framework for modeling investor choices. The following topics will be covered:
More informationApril 28, Decision Analysis 2. Utility Theory The Value of Information
15.053 April 28, 2005 Decision Analysis 2 Utility Theory The Value of Information 1 Lotteries and Utility L1 $50,000 $ 0 Lottery 1: a 50% chance at $50,000 and a 50% chance of nothing. L2 $20,000 Lottery
More informationAdvanced Microeconomic Theory
Advanced Microeconomic Theory Lecture Notes Sérgio O. Parreiras Fall, 2016 Outline Mathematical Toolbox Decision Theory Partial Equilibrium Search Intertemporal Consumption General Equilibrium Financial
More informationPreference Reversals Without the Independence Axiom
Georgia State University ScholarWorks @ Georgia State University Economics Faculty Publications Department of Economics 1989 Preference Reversals Without the Independence Axiom James C. Cox Georgia State
More informationNotes for Session 2, Expected Utility Theory, Summer School 2009 T.Seidenfeld 1
Session 2: Expected Utility In our discussion of betting from Session 1, we required the bookie to accept (as fair) the combination of two gambles, when each gamble, on its own, is judged fair. That is,
More information1 Consumption and saving under uncertainty
1 Consumption and saving under uncertainty 1.1 Modelling uncertainty As in the deterministic case, we keep assuming that agents live for two periods. The novelty here is that their earnings in the second
More informationMarch 30, Why do economists (and increasingly, engineers and computer scientists) study auctions?
March 3, 215 Steven A. Matthews, A Technical Primer on Auction Theory I: Independent Private Values, Northwestern University CMSEMS Discussion Paper No. 196, May, 1995. This paper is posted on the course
More information8/28/2017. ECON4260 Behavioral Economics. 2 nd lecture. Expected utility. What is a lottery?
ECON4260 Behavioral Economics 2 nd lecture Cumulative Prospect Theory Expected utility This is a theory for ranking lotteries Can be seen as normative: This is how I wish my preferences looked like Or
More informationName. Final Exam, Economics 210A, December 2014 Answer any 7 of these 8 questions Good luck!
Name Final Exam, Economics 210A, December 2014 Answer any 7 of these 8 questions Good luck! 1) For each of the following statements, state whether it is true or false. If it is true, prove that it is true.
More informationMaking Hard Decision. ENCE 627 Decision Analysis for Engineering. Identify the decision situation and understand objectives. Identify alternatives
CHAPTER Duxbury Thomson Learning Making Hard Decision Third Edition RISK ATTITUDES A. J. Clark School of Engineering Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering 13 FALL 2003 By Dr. Ibrahim. Assakkaf
More informationChapter 1. Utility Theory. 1.1 Introduction
Chapter 1 Utility Theory 1.1 Introduction St. Petersburg Paradox (gambling paradox) the birth to the utility function http://policonomics.com/saint-petersburg-paradox/ The St. Petersburg paradox, is a
More informationE&G, Chap 10 - Utility Analysis; the Preference Structure, Uncertainty - Developing Indifference Curves in {E(R),σ(R)} Space.
1 E&G, Chap 10 - Utility Analysis; the Preference Structure, Uncertainty - Developing Indifference Curves in {E(R),σ(R)} Space. A. Overview. c 2 1. With Certainty, objects of choice (c 1, c 2 ) 2. With
More informationANASH EQUILIBRIUM of a strategic game is an action profile in which every. Strategy Equilibrium
Draft chapter from An introduction to game theory by Martin J. Osborne. Version: 2002/7/23. Martin.Osborne@utoronto.ca http://www.economics.utoronto.ca/osborne Copyright 1995 2002 by Martin J. Osborne.
More informationProblem Set 3: Suggested Solutions
Microeconomics: Pricing 3E Fall 5. True or false: Problem Set 3: Suggested Solutions (a) Since a durable goods monopolist prices at the monopoly price in her last period of operation, the prices must be
More informationChoose between the four lotteries with unknown probabilities on the branches: uncertainty
R.E.Marks 2000 Lecture 8-1 2.11 Utility Choose between the four lotteries with unknown probabilities on the branches: uncertainty A B C D $25 $150 $600 $80 $90 $98 $ 20 $0 $100$1000 $105$ 100 R.E.Marks
More informationIntroduction to Economics I: Consumer Theory
Introduction to Economics I: Consumer Theory Leslie Reinhorn Durham University Business School October 2014 What is Economics? Typical De nitions: "Economics is the social science that deals with the production,
More informationCharacterization of the Optimum
ECO 317 Economics of Uncertainty Fall Term 2009 Notes for lectures 5. Portfolio Allocation with One Riskless, One Risky Asset Characterization of the Optimum Consider a risk-averse, expected-utility-maximizing
More informationPrice Theory Lecture 9: Choice Under Uncertainty
I. Probability and Expected Value Price Theory Lecture 9: Choice Under Uncertainty In all that we have done so far, we've assumed that choices are being made under conditions of certainty -- prices are
More informationDecision Theory. Refail N. Kasimbeyli
Decision Theory Refail N. Kasimbeyli Chapter 3 3 Utility Theory 3.1 Single-attribute utility 3.2 Interpreting utility functions 3.3 Utility functions for non-monetary attributes 3.4 The axioms of utility
More informationChoice Under Uncertainty
Chapter 6 Choice Under Uncertainty Up until now, we have been concerned with choice under certainty. A consumer chooses which commodity bundle to consume. A producer chooses how much output to produce
More informationLearning Objectives = = where X i is the i t h outcome of a decision, p i is the probability of the i t h
Learning Objectives After reading Chapter 15 and working the problems for Chapter 15 in the textbook and in this Workbook, you should be able to: Distinguish between decision making under uncertainty and
More informationMicroeconomics 3200/4200:
Microeconomics 3200/4200: Part 1 P. Piacquadio p.g.piacquadio@econ.uio.no September 25, 2017 P. Piacquadio (p.g.piacquadio@econ.uio.no) Micro 3200/4200 September 25, 2017 1 / 23 Example (1) Suppose I take
More informationRegret Lotteries: Short-Run Gains, Long-run Losses For Online Publication: Appendix B - Screenshots and Instructions
Regret Lotteries: Short-Run Gains, Long-run Losses For Online Publication: Appendix B - Screenshots and Instructions Alex Imas Diego Lamé Alistair J. Wilson February, 2017 Contents B1 Interface Screenshots.........................
More informationPart 4: Market Failure II - Asymmetric Information - Uncertainty
Part 4: Market Failure II - Asymmetric Information - Uncertainty Expected Utility, Risk Aversion, Risk Neutrality, Risk Pooling, Insurance July 2016 - Asymmetric Information - Uncertainty July 2016 1 /
More informationUtility and Choice Under Uncertainty
Introduction to Microeconomics Utility and Choice Under Uncertainty The Five Axioms of Choice Under Uncertainty We can use the axioms of preference to show how preferences can be mapped into measurable
More informationFurther Reflections on Prospect Theory
Further Reflections on Prospect Theory Susan K. Laury and Charles A. Holt * June 2002 Abstract This paper reports a new experimental test of prospect theory s reflection effect. We conduct a sequence of
More informationRevenue Equivalence and Income Taxation
Journal of Economics and Finance Volume 24 Number 1 Spring 2000 Pages 56-63 Revenue Equivalence and Income Taxation Veronika Grimm and Ulrich Schmidt* Abstract This paper considers the classical independent
More informationSubjective Expected Utility Theory
Subjective Expected Utility Theory Mark Dean Behavioral Economics Spring 2017 Introduction In the first class we drew a distinction betweem Circumstances of Risk (roulette wheels) Circumstances of Uncertainty
More informationProject Risk Analysis and Management Exercises (Part II, Chapters 6, 7)
Project Risk Analysis and Management Exercises (Part II, Chapters 6, 7) Chapter II.6 Exercise 1 For the decision tree in Figure 1, assume Chance Events E and F are independent. a) Draw the appropriate
More informationReduction of Compound Lotteries with. Objective Probabilities: Theory and Evidence
Reduction of Compound Lotteries with Objective Probabilities: Theory and Evidence by Glenn W. Harrison, Jimmy Martínez-Correa and J. Todd Swarthout July 2015 ABSTRACT. The reduction of compound lotteries
More informationif a < b 0 if a = b 4 b if a > b Alice has commissioned two economists to advise her on whether to accept the challenge.
THE COINFLIPPER S DILEMMA by Steven E. Landsburg University of Rochester. Alice s Dilemma. Bob has challenged Alice to a coin-flipping contest. If she accepts, they ll each flip a fair coin repeatedly
More informationECON FINANCIAL ECONOMICS
ECON 337901 FINANCIAL ECONOMICS Peter Ireland Boston College April 10, 2018 These lecture notes by Peter Ireland are licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommerical-ShareAlike 4.0 International
More informationInvestment Decisions and Negative Interest Rates
Investment Decisions and Negative Interest Rates No. 16-23 Anat Bracha Abstract: While the current European Central Bank deposit rate and 2-year German government bond yields are negative, the U.S. 2-year
More informationAmbiguity Aversion. Mark Dean. Lecture Notes for Spring 2015 Behavioral Economics - Brown University
Ambiguity Aversion Mark Dean Lecture Notes for Spring 2015 Behavioral Economics - Brown University 1 Subjective Expected Utility So far, we have been considering the roulette wheel world of objective probabilities:
More information05/05/2011. Degree of Risk. Degree of Risk. BUSA 4800/4810 May 5, Uncertainty
BUSA 4800/4810 May 5, 2011 Uncertainty We must believe in luck. For how else can we explain the success of those we don t like? Jean Cocteau Degree of Risk We incorporate risk and uncertainty into our
More informationGame Theory - Lecture #8
Game Theory - Lecture #8 Outline: Randomized actions vnm & Bernoulli payoff functions Mixed strategies & Nash equilibrium Hawk/Dove & Mixed strategies Random models Goal: Would like a formulation in which
More informationPart 1 In which we meet the law of averages. The Law of Averages. The Expected Value & The Standard Error. Where Are We Going?
1 The Law of Averages The Expected Value & The Standard Error Where Are We Going? Sums of random numbers The law of averages Box models for generating random numbers Sums of draws: the Expected Value Standard
More informationLecture 12: Introduction to reasoning under uncertainty. Actions and Consequences
Lecture 12: Introduction to reasoning under uncertainty Preferences Utility functions Maximizing expected utility Value of information Bandit problems and the exploration-exploitation trade-off COMP-424,
More information