Violations of coalescing in parametric utility measurement

Cite This

Files in this item

Checksum: MD5:320dc7b58843f86d25bb3e32eaa1d292

GLÖCKNER, Andreas, Baiba RENERTE, Ulrich SCHMIDT, 2020. Violations of coalescing in parametric utility measurement. In: Theory and Decision. Springer. 89(4), pp. 471-501. ISSN 0040-5833. eISSN 1573-7187. Available under: doi: 10.1007/s11238-020-09761-5

@article{Glockner2020-11Viola-50432, title={Violations of coalescing in parametric utility measurement}, year={2020}, doi={10.1007/s11238-020-09761-5}, number={4}, volume={89}, issn={0040-5833}, journal={Theory and Decision}, pages={471--501}, author={Glöckner, Andreas and Renerte, Baiba and Schmidt, Ulrich} }

<rdf:RDF xmlns:dcterms="" xmlns:dc="" xmlns:rdf="" xmlns:bibo="" xmlns:dspace="" xmlns:foaf="" xmlns:void="" xmlns:xsd="" > <rdf:Description rdf:about=""> <dcterms:isPartOf rdf:resource=""/> <dspace:hasBitstream rdf:resource=""/> <dc:language>eng</dc:language> <bibo:uri rdf:resource=""/> <dc:contributor>Glöckner, Andreas</dc:contributor> <dc:date rdf:datatype="">2020-08-04T11:47:59Z</dc:date> <dcterms:title>Violations of coalescing in parametric utility measurement</dcterms:title> <dcterms:available rdf:datatype="">2020-08-04T11:47:59Z</dcterms:available> <dcterms:rights rdf:resource=""/> <dcterms:issued>2020-11</dcterms:issued> <dcterms:hasPart rdf:resource=""/> <dc:contributor>Schmidt, Ulrich</dc:contributor> <void:sparqlEndpoint rdf:resource="http://localhost/fuseki/dspace/sparql"/> <dc:creator>Schmidt, Ulrich</dc:creator> <dc:rights>Attribution 4.0 International</dc:rights> <dc:contributor>Renerte, Baiba</dc:contributor> <dc:creator>Glöckner, Andreas</dc:creator> <dspace:isPartOfCollection rdf:resource=""/> <foaf:homepage rdf:resource="http://localhost:8080/jspui"/> <dc:creator>Renerte, Baiba</dc:creator> <dcterms:abstract xml:lang="eng">The majority consensus in the empirical literature is that probability weighting functions are typically inverse-S shaped, that is, people tend to overweight small and underweight large probabilities. A separate stream of literature has reported event-splitting effects (also called violations of coalescing) and shown that they can explain violations of expected utility. This leads to the questions whether (1) the observed shape of weighting functions is a mere consequence of the coalesced presentation and, more generally, whether (2) preference elicitation should rely on presenting lotteries in a canonical split form instead of the commonly used coalesced form. We analyze data from a binary choice experiment where all lottery pairs are presented in both split and coalesced forms. Our results show that the presentation in a split form leads to a better fit of expected utility theory and to probability weighting functions that are closer to linear. We thus provide some evidence that the extent of probability weighting is not an ingrained feature, but rather a result of processing difficulties.</dcterms:abstract> </rdf:Description> </rdf:RDF>

Downloads since Aug 4, 2020 (Information about access statistics)

Gloeckner_2-p86wfz2sbvkc5.pdf 55

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Attribution 4.0 International Except where otherwise noted, this item's license is described as Attribution 4.0 International

Search KOPS


My Account