Rational theories of finance tell us how people should behave and often do not reflect reality.
|
|
- Muriel Barton
- 5 years ago
- Views:
Transcription
1 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 cannot be construed as a superior alternative to behavioral approaches, merely because it discusses how people should behave but a not well-explained empirically. If people do not behave this way, there are limitation to helping us understand the observed market behavior. Neoclassical economics 1. People have rational preferences across possible outcomes 2. People maximize utility and firms maximize profits 3. People make independent decisions based on all relevant information Expected Utility theory First proposed by Daniel Bernoulli in 1728 in response to solving what reasonable price an individual should pay to enter a gamble. A coin is flipped repeatedly until a head is produced; if you enter the game you receive a payoff of $2 n where n is the number of the throw producing the first head. E(V) = ½ (2) + ¼ (4) + ⅛(8) + = or in general E V = ( &)$ $ % & 2 & But even though the expected value of this gamble is infinite, most people would be unwilling to pay more than a few dollars St. Petersburg Paradox. Bernoulli chose a logarithmic utility function to explain that the expected utility of the game is indeed finite. E U V = ( &)$ Equivalent) of e $.789 $4.00 $ % & ln (2 & ) This corresponds to a certain value (Certainty where U(x) = ln(x) Preferences are defined over prospects, where a prospect is a list of consequences or outcomes with associated probabilities. - Assume all consequences and probabilities are known to the investor.
2 In choosing among prospects, the investor can be said to confront a situation of risk (in contrast with situations of uncertainty in which as least some of the outcomes or probabilities are unknown) Any prospect q can be represented by a probability distribution q = (p 1, p 2,, p n ) over a fixed set of pure consequences X = (x 1, x 2,, x n ), where p i is the probability of x i, p i 0 and Σp i = 1. Reducing compound lottery All the lotteries involved in a compound lottery are always assumed to be independent of each other and so it is easy to reduce a compound lottery to a simple lottery Experimental evidence has suggested that people tend to prefer the compound form of the lottery (on the left, above), rather than its reduced form (on the right here). This is particularly likely when the probabilities of winning in the first part of the compound lottery are high.?? Axioms of EUT There are four axioms of the expected utility theory that define a rational decision maker. They are completeness, transitivity, independence and continuity. Completeness: For all q, r: either q r or r q or q r where represents the relation: q is (weakly) preferred to r. Transitivity: For all q, r, s: ifq r and r s then q s Continuity: requires that for all prospects q, r, s Where q r and r s, there exists some probability p such that q, p; s, 1 p r that is, there is some mixture of the prospects q and s for which the investor will be indifferent to choosing prospect r Independence: It assumes that two gambles mixed with an irrelevant third one will maintain the same order of preference as when the two are presented independently of the third one.
3 EUT provides one very simple way of combining probabilities and consequences into a single measure of value which has a number of appealing properties. One such property is monotonicity: Monotonicity is the property that stochastically dominating prospects are always preferred to prospects which they dominate. This is a fairly basic concept in rationality it says that if q stochastically dominates r, then the expected value of q is higher than r. The expected utility theory takes into account that individuals may be risk-averse, meaning that the individual would refuse a fair gamble (a fair gamble has an expected value of zero) The shape of the utility function also has a simple behavioural interpretation whereby concavity (convexity) of u(.) implies risk averse (seeking) behaviour. Someone with a concave utility function will always prefer a certain amount X to any risky prospect with expected value equal to X. E.g. A risk-averse individual will accept less than $50 rather than take a coin toss which would yield $100 if heads and $0 otherwise. If they would accept $40 for sure, rather than taking the gamble, this would be the certainty equivalent. We work this out by finding the certain value with the same utility as the risky gamble. The difference between the expected value and the certainty equivalent is the risk premium from taking the gamble.
4 Absolute risk aversion: Ra(x) = u (x)/u (x) More wealth is preferred to less, but utility grows at decreasing rate. This gives the concave shape we would normally expect in utility functions. Relative risk aversion: Rr(x) = x. u (x)/u (x) As wealth increases the level of the risk premium increases at a decreasing rate. Constant absolute risk aversion (CARA): E.g. u x = e STU level of risk aversion does not depend on wealth, risk aversion does not change with changes in wealth Constant relative risk aversion (CRRA): E.g. u(x) = x 1-β /(1-β) if β 1 and u(x) = log(x) is β = 1 As wealth increases the level of the risk premium increases proportionally Limitations of EUT It is precisely the simplicity and economy of EUT that has made it such a powerful and tractable modelling tool. The problem, however, is with the descriptive merits of the theory whether EUT provides a sufficiently accurate representation of actual choice behaviour. The evidence from a large number of empirical tests has raised some real doubts There is now a large body of evidence indicating that actual choice behaviour may systematically violate the independence axiom. Systematic violations, rather than random or idiosyncratic violations, suggest descriptive failings of Expected Utility Theory Two examples of such phenomena are Common Consequence Effect Common Ratio Effect The Allais paradox is a choice problem designed by Maurice Allais (1953) to show an inconsistency of actual observed choices with the predictions of expected utility theory. Example Problem 1: Choose between Prospect A and Prospect B. Prospect A: $2,500 with probability 0.33 $2,400 with probability 0.66 $0 with probability 0.01 Prospect B: $2,400 with certainty
5 Problem 2: Choose between Prospect C and Prospect D. Prospect C: $2,500 with probability 0.33 $0 with probability 0.67 Prospect D: $2,400 with probability 0.34 $0 with probability 0.66 It has been shown by Daniel Kahneman and Amos Tversky (1979, Prospect Theory: An analysis of decision under risk, Econometrica, 47 (2), ) that more people choose B with Problem 1 and more people choose C when presented with Problem 2. These choices violate Expected Utility Theory. Why? Individuals fail to rationally value each gamble. In the first problem, there is an overvalue on certainty. In the second problem, there is more value placed on the higher potential upside, even though the probabilities are similar.
6 FINC3023 TOPIC 2: Expected Utility Theory Cont. The probability triangle By convention, horizontal axis measures the probability of the worst consequence ($0), increasing from left to right. The vertical axis measures the probability of the best consequence ($5M increase from bottom to top. Hypotenuse is the probability of outcome for the middle consequence. S1 - $1M for sure S probability of $0 and 0.11 probability of $1M R probability of $0, 0.1 probability of $5M and 0.89 probability of $1M. R2 0.9 probability of $0M and 0.1 probability of $5M The independence axiom of EUT restricts the indifference curves to being 1. Upward sloping 2. Linear 3. Parallel Slope = attitude to risk i.e. more risk averse individual, the steeper the slope of the indifference curves.
7 If individual 1 = blue, individual 2 = orange What we are shown is that relative to individual 1, we need to give individual 2 higher chances of winning the best possible outcome as we moving in the north west direction to generate indifference with the safe prospect of s. In relation to the Allais paradox problems (first triangle) for a given individual, EUT allows three possibilities. Indifference curves could have a steeper slope than the lines connecting prospects, in which case s $ r $ and s % r %. This is as in the figure. Alternatively, indifference curves could have a less steep slope, in which case r $ s $ and r % s % - Finally, the slope of indifference curves could correspond exactly with that of the lines joining pairs of prospects, in which case r $ s $ and r % s % But we know people often violate EUT revealing s $ r $ in the first lottery and r % s % in the second (right) lottery. So by choosing r2 over s2, we see people being more risk adverse than they should be given that they choose s1 over r1 i.e. common consequence effect.
8 There is a similar tendency in the common ratio effect. Assuming EUT preferences, an individual must prefer the safer option in both choices or the risker option in both choices. We instead see Many people choose s 1 ** over r 1 ** and r 2 ** over s 2 **. Therefore, any theory that seeks to explain this standard violation of EUT needs to have the following properties: Risk seeking (or at least less risk averse) for low probabilities: E.g. {s 2, r 2 } Risk Averse for high probabilities: E.g. {s 1, r 1 } Fanning out hypothesis There is where we get the fanning out hypothesis. Indifference curves are relatively steeper sloped in the neighborhood of prospect m, such that m lies on a higher indifference curve that p and r, and flatter in the bottom right-hand corner such that t lies on a higher indifference curve than s.
9 Hence, for an individual whose indifference curves fan out we can construct prospects over which we will observe: - A common consequence effect (m q and t s) - A common ratio effect (m r and t s). Loosely speaking, this means that agents tend to be more risk adverse as the prospects they face get better i.e. indifference curves become steeper or fan out as we move to the northwest corner of the triangle. Summary Individuals demonstrate predictable systematic violations of Expected Utility Theory The Allais paradox (i.e. common consequence/common ratio effects) demonstrated that people tended to be more risk averse in high probability gambles and less risk adverse in lower probability gambles. e.g. they selected $3,000 for sure over ($4,000, 0.8; $0, 0.2) but would typically select ($4,000, 0.2; $0, 0.8) over ($3,000, 0.25; $0, 0.75) This is inconsistent with EUT as: Indifference curves are parallel in the probability triangle the ratio of 0.8 / 1 (probability of getting $4000/ probability of getting $3000) is identical to 0.2 / 0.25 in the two lotteries. You must select either the safe option or the risky option in both lotteries according to EUT, which does not occur in empirical evidence. The failure of EUT to match observed decision making processes by individuals stems from the violation of the independence axiom More generalised decision making models allow for a relaxation of the independence axiom Independence requires that for all prospects q, r, s: if q r then (q, p; s, 1 p ) r, p; s, 1 p for all p
Choice 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 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 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 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 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 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 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 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 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 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 informationFinancial Economics. A Concise Introduction to Classical and Behavioral Finance Chapter 2. Thorsten Hens and Marc Oliver Rieger
Financial Economics A Concise Introduction to Classical and Behavioral Finance Chapter 2 Thorsten Hens and Marc Oliver Rieger Swiss Banking Institute, University of Zurich / BWL, University of Trier July
More informationSolution Guide to Exercises for Chapter 4 Decision making under uncertainty
THE ECONOMICS OF FINANCIAL MARKETS R. E. BAILEY Solution Guide to Exercises for Chapter 4 Decision making under uncertainty 1. Consider an investor who makes decisions according to a mean-variance objective.
More informationEconomic Risk and Decision Analysis for Oil and Gas Industry CE School of Engineering and Technology Asian Institute of Technology
Economic Risk and Decision Analysis for Oil and Gas Industry CE81.9008 School of Engineering and Technology Asian Institute of Technology January Semester Presented by Dr. Thitisak Boonpramote Department
More informationComparison 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 informationKey concepts: Certainty Equivalent and Risk Premium
Certainty equivalents Risk premiums 19 Key concepts: Certainty Equivalent and Risk Premium Which is the amount of money that is equivalent in your mind to a given situation that involves uncertainty? Ex:
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 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 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 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 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 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 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 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 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 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 informationManagerial Economics Uncertainty
Managerial Economics Uncertainty Aalto University School of Science Department of Industrial Engineering and Management January 10 26, 2017 Dr. Arto Kovanen, Ph.D. Visiting Lecturer Uncertainty general
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 information3.1 The Marschak-Machina triangle and risk aversion
Chapter 3 Risk aversion 3.1 The Marschak-Machina triangle and risk aversion One of the earliest, and most useful, graphical tools used to analyse choice under uncertainty was a triangular graph that was
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 informationA Theory of Risk without Expected Utility
A Theory of Risk without Expected Utility By Hak Choi * Abstract This paper challenges the use of expected value concepts - including expected return, expected utility, non-expected utility and weighted
More informationTECHNIQUES FOR DECISION MAKING IN RISKY CONDITIONS
RISK AND UNCERTAINTY THREE ALTERNATIVE STATES OF INFORMATION CERTAINTY - where the decision maker is perfectly informed in advance about the outcome of their decisions. For each decision there is only
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 informationSession 9: The expected utility framework p. 1
Session 9: The expected utility framework Susan Thomas http://www.igidr.ac.in/ susant susant@mayin.org IGIDR Bombay Session 9: The expected utility framework p. 1 Questions How do humans make decisions
More informationECON 312: MICROECONOMICS II Lecture 11: W/C 25 th April 2016 Uncertainty and Risk Dr Ebo Turkson
ECON 312: MICROECONOMICS II Lecture 11: W/C 25 th April 2016 Uncertainty and Risk Dr Ebo Turkson Chapter 17 Uncertainty Topics Degree of Risk. Decision Making Under Uncertainty. Avoiding Risk. Investing
More information16 MAKING SIMPLE DECISIONS
247 16 MAKING SIMPLE DECISIONS Let us associate each state S with a numeric utility U(S), which expresses the desirability of the state A nondeterministic action A will have possible outcome states Result
More informationUC Berkeley Haas School of Business Economic Analysis for Business Decisions (EWMBA 201A) Fall Module I
UC Berkeley Haas School of Business Economic Analysis for Business Decisions (EWMBA 201A) Fall 2018 Module I The consumers Decision making under certainty (PR 3.1-3.4) Decision making under uncertainty
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 informationNon-Monotonicity of the Tversky- Kahneman Probability-Weighting Function: A Cautionary Note
European Financial Management, Vol. 14, No. 3, 2008, 385 390 doi: 10.1111/j.1468-036X.2007.00439.x Non-Monotonicity of the Tversky- Kahneman Probability-Weighting Function: A Cautionary Note Jonathan Ingersoll
More informationECON FINANCIAL ECONOMICS
ECON 337901 FINANCIAL ECONOMICS Peter Ireland Boston College April 3, 2018 These lecture notes by Peter Ireland are licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommerical-ShareAlike 4.0 International
More informationUncertainty. Contingent consumption Subjective probability. Utility functions. BEE2017 Microeconomics
Uncertainty BEE217 Microeconomics Uncertainty: The share prices of Amazon and the difficulty of investment decisions Contingent consumption 1. What consumption or wealth will you get in each possible outcome
More informationUC Berkeley Haas School of Business Economic Analysis for Business Decisions (EWMBA 201A) Fall Module I
UC Berkeley Haas School of Business Economic Analysis for Business Decisions (EWMBA 201A) Fall 2016 Module I The consumers Decision making under certainty (PR 3.1-3.4) Decision making under uncertainty
More informationFinancial Economics: Making Choices in Risky Situations
Financial Economics: Making Choices in Risky Situations Shuoxun Hellen Zhang WISE & SOE XIAMEN UNIVERSITY March, 2015 1 / 57 Questions to Answer How financial risk is defined and measured How an investor
More informationChoice Under Uncertainty
Choice Under Uncertainty Lotteries Without uncertainty, there is no need to distinguish between a consumer s choice between alternatives and the resulting outcome. A consumption bundle is the choice and
More informationTHE CODING OF OUTCOMES IN TAXPAYERS REPORTING DECISIONS. A. Schepanski The University of Iowa
THE CODING OF OUTCOMES IN TAXPAYERS REPORTING DECISIONS A. Schepanski The University of Iowa May 2001 The author thanks Teri Shearer and the participants of The University of Iowa Judgment and Decision-Making
More information16 MAKING SIMPLE DECISIONS
253 16 MAKING SIMPLE DECISIONS Let us associate each state S with a numeric utility U(S), which expresses the desirability of the state A nondeterministic action a will have possible outcome states Result(a)
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 informationAttitudes Toward Risk. Joseph Tao-yi Wang 2013/10/16. (Lecture 11, Micro Theory I)
Joseph Tao-yi Wang 2013/10/16 (Lecture 11, Micro Theory I) Dealing with Uncertainty 2 Preferences over risky choices (Section 7.1) One simple model: Expected Utility How can old tools be applied to analyze
More informationRisk Aversion, Stochastic Dominance, and Rules of Thumb: Concept and Application
Risk Aversion, Stochastic Dominance, and Rules of Thumb: Concept and Application Vivek H. Dehejia Carleton University and CESifo Email: vdehejia@ccs.carleton.ca January 14, 2008 JEL classification code:
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 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 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 informationBehavioral Economics & the Design of Agricultural Index Insurance in Developing Countries
Behavioral Economics & the Design of Agricultural Index Insurance in Developing Countries Michael R Carter Department of Agricultural & Resource Economics BASIS Assets & Market Access Research Program
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 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 informationLecture 2 Basic Tools for Portfolio Analysis
1 Lecture 2 Basic Tools for Portfolio Analysis Alexander K Koch Department of Economics, Royal Holloway, University of London October 8, 27 In addition to learning the material covered in the reading and
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 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 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 informationWhat do Coin Tosses and Decision Making under Uncertainty, have in common?
What do Coin Tosses and Decision Making under Uncertainty, have in common? J. Rene van Dorp (GW) Presentation EMSE 1001 October 27, 2017 Presented by: J. Rene van Dorp 10/26/2017 1 About René van Dorp
More informationFraming Lottery Choices
Framing Lottery Choices by Dale O. Stahl Department of Economics University of Texas at Austin stahl@eco.utexas.edu February 3, 2016 ABSTRACT There are many ways to present lotteries to human subjects:
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 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 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 informationTheory of Consumer Behavior First, we need to define the agents' goals and limitations (if any) in their ability to achieve those goals.
Theory of Consumer Behavior First, we need to define the agents' goals and limitations (if any) in their ability to achieve those goals. We will deal with a particular set of assumptions, but we can modify
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 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 informationPAULI MURTO, ANDREY ZHUKOV
GAME THEORY SOLUTION SET 1 WINTER 018 PAULI MURTO, ANDREY ZHUKOV Introduction For suggested solution to problem 4, last year s suggested solutions by Tsz-Ning Wong were used who I think used suggested
More informationProblem Set 2. Theory of Banking - Academic Year Maria Bachelet March 2, 2017
Problem Set Theory of Banking - Academic Year 06-7 Maria Bachelet maria.jua.bachelet@gmai.com March, 07 Exercise Consider an agency relationship in which the principal contracts the agent, whose effort
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 informationFinancial Mathematics III Theory summary
Financial Mathematics III Theory summary Table of Contents Lecture 1... 7 1. State the objective of modern portfolio theory... 7 2. Define the return of an asset... 7 3. How is expected return defined?...
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 informationFoundations of Financial Economics Choice under uncertainty
Foundations of Financial Economics Choice under uncertainty Paulo Brito 1 pbrito@iseg.ulisboa.pt University of Lisbon March 9, 2018 Topics covered Contingent goods Comparing contingent goods Decision under
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 Solutions
Problem Set 3 Solutions Ec 030 Feb 9, 205 Problem (3 points) Suppose that Tomasz is using the pessimistic criterion where the utility of a lottery is equal to the smallest prize it gives with a positive
More informationUNCERTAINTY AND INFORMATION
UNCERTAINTY AND INFORMATION M. En C. Eduardo Bustos Farías 1 Objectives After studying this chapter, you will be able to: Explain how people make decisions when they are uncertain about the consequences
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 informationAnswers To Chapter 6. Review Questions
Answers To Chapter 6 Review Questions 1 Answer d Individuals can also affect their hours through working more than one job, vacations, and leaves of absence 2 Answer d Typically when one observes indifference
More informationExpected Utility Theory
Expected Utility Theory Mark Dean Behavioral Economics Spring 27 Introduction Up until now, we have thought of subjects choosing between objects Used cars Hamburgers Monetary amounts However, often the
More information1. Suppose that instead of a lump sum tax the government introduced a proportional income tax such that:
hapter Review Questions. Suppose that instead of a lump sum tax the government introduced a proportional income tax such that: T = t where t is the marginal tax rate. a. What is the new relationship between
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 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 informationIntro to Economic analysis
Intro to Economic analysis Alberto Bisin - NYU 1 The Consumer Problem Consider an agent choosing her consumption of goods 1 and 2 for a given budget. This is the workhorse of microeconomic theory. (Notice
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 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 informationA. Introduction to choice under uncertainty 2. B. Risk aversion 11. C. Favorable gambles 15. D. Measures of risk aversion 20. E.
Microeconomic Theory -1- Uncertainty Choice under uncertainty A Introduction to choice under uncertainty B Risk aversion 11 C Favorable gambles 15 D Measures of risk aversion 0 E Insurance 6 F Small favorable
More informationBehavioral Finance Driven Investment Strategies
Behavioral Finance Driven Investment Strategies Prof. Dr. Rudi Zagst, Technical University of Munich joint work with L. Brummer, M. Escobar, A. Lichtenstern, M. Wahl 1 Behavioral Finance Driven Investment
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 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 informationSelf Control, Risk Aversion, and the Allais Paradox
Self Control, Risk Aversion, and the Allais Paradox Drew Fudenberg* and David K. Levine** This Version: October 14, 2009 Behavioral Economics The paradox of the inner child in all of us More behavioral
More informationRepresenting Risk Preferences in Expected Utility Based Decision Models
Representing Risk Preferences in Expected Utility Based Decision Models Jack Meyer Department of Economics Michigan State University East Lansing, MI 48824 jmeyer@msu.edu SCC-76: Economics and Management
More informationANSWERS TO PRACTICE PROBLEMS oooooooooooooooo
University of California, Davis Department of Economics Giacomo Bonanno Economics 03: Economics of uncertainty and information TO PRACTICE PROBLEMS oooooooooooooooo PROBLEM # : The expected value of the
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 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 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 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 informationIntertemporal Risk Attitude. Lecture 7. Kreps & Porteus Preference for Early or Late Resolution of Risk
Intertemporal Risk Attitude Lecture 7 Kreps & Porteus Preference for Early or Late Resolution of Risk is an intrinsic preference for the timing of risk resolution is a general characteristic of recursive
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 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 informationEXTRA PROBLEMS. and. a b c d
EXTRA PROBLEMS (1) In the following matching problem, each college has the capacity for only a single student (each college will admit only one student). The colleges are denoted by A, B, C, D, while the
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 information