Background risk in generalized expected utility theory

Summary. In this paper, it is shown that, for a wide range of risk-averse generalized expected utility preferences, independent risks are complementary, contrary to the results for expected utility preferences satisfying conditions such as proper and standard risk aversion. Received: August 10, 2001; revised version: June 18, 2002 RID="*" ID="*"I thank Simon Grant and an anonymous referee for helpful comments and criticism. This research was supported by an Australian Research Council Senior Fellowship and Australian Research Council Large Grant A79800678.     

More pessimism than greediness: a characterization of monotone risk aversion in the rank-dependent expected utility model

Summary. This paper studies monotone risk aversion, the aversion to monotone, mean-preserving increase in risk (Quiggin [21]), in the Rank Dependent Expected Utility (RDEU) model. This model replaces expected utility by another functional, characterized by two functions, a utility function u in conjunction with a probability-perception function f. Monotone mean-preserving increases in risk are closely related to the notion of comparative dispersion introduced by Bickel and Lehmann [3,4] in Non-parametric Statistics. We present a characterization of the pairs (u,f) of monotone risk averse decision makers, based on an index of greediness G _u of the utility function u and an index of pessimism P _f of the probability perception function f: the decision maker is monotone risk averse if and only if . The index of greediness (non-concavity) of u is the supremum of taken over . The index of pessimism of f is the infimum of taken over 0 < v < 1. Thus, , with G _u = 1 iff u is concave. If then , i.e., f is majorized by the identity function. Since P _f = 1 for Expected Utility maximizers, forces u to be concave in this case; thus, the characterization of risk aversion as is a direct generalization from EU to RDEU. A novel element is that concavity of u is not necessary. In fact, u must be concave only if P _f = 1.Received: 10 April 2001, Revised: 18 November 2003, JEL Classification Numbers: D81. Correspondence to: Michéle CohenAlain Chateauneuf, Michéle Cohen, Isaac Meilijson: We are most grateful to Mark Machina, Peter Wakker and two anonymous referees for very helpful suggestions and comments.     

Risk preference and indirect utility in portfolio-choice problems

We consider a portfolio-choice problem with one risky and one safe asset, where the utility function exhibits decreasing absolute risk aversion (DARA). We show that the indirect utility function of the portfolio-choice problem need not exhibit DARA. However, if the (optimal) marginal propensity to invest is positive for both assets, which is true when the utility function exhibits nondecreasing relative risk aversion, then the DARA property is carried over from the direct to the indirect utility function.     

基于后悔规避的投资组合模型及其实证分析

由于人的情感、认知等因素对投资活动有直接影响,本文在投资活动中引入人的情感因素,提出了基于后悔规避的投资者效用函数,该效用函数是期末财富和预期财富的函数。建立了存在无风险资产时的最优投资组合模型,发现基于后悔规避投资组合模型的组合前沿存在两基金分离的现象。对我国上海股票市场进行了实证分析,得到了基于后悔规避投资组合模型的组合前沿,并验证了组合前沿存在两基金分离现象的结论。     

Risk Attitudes of Children and Adults: Choices Over Small and Large Probability Gains and Losses

In this paper we examine how risk attitudes change with age. We present participants from age 5 to 64 with choices between simple gambles and the expected value of the gambles. The gambles are over both gains and losses, and vary in the probability of the non-zero payoff. Surprisingly, we find that many participants are risk seeking when faced with high-probability prospects over gains and risk averse when faced with small-probability prospects. Over losses we find the exact opposite. Children's choices are consistent with the underweighting of low-probability events and the overweighting of high-probability ones. This tendency diminishes with age, and on average adults appear to use the objective probability when evaluating risky prospects.     

Range convexity and ambiguity averse preferences

We show that range convexity of beliefs, a `technical' condition that appears naturally in axiomatizations of preferences in a Savage-like framework, imposes some unexpected restrictions when modelling ambiguity averse preferences. That is, when it is added to a mild condition, range convexity makes the preferences collapse to subjective expected utility as soon as they satisfy structural conditions that are typically used to characterize ambiguity aversion. Received: February 25, 2000; revised version: April 17, 2000     

Theories of choice under risk: Insights from financial markets

To date, the plausibility of theories of choice under risk hinges are mainly on experimental evidence. This paper devises and implements an approach amenable of assessing the performance of three families of models (expected utility, rank-dependent expected utility, and the cumulative prospect theory) using information from financial asset markets. Our findings unequivocally support reference-point dependence, diminishing marginal sensitivity, loss aversion, and nonlinear weighting of (gain and loss) physical probabilities. The empirical observations are found to be robust to, inter alia, the parameterization of the utility and probability weighting functions, “day-of-the-week effects”, the choice of a reference point, and the introduction of possible, low-probability market crashes (peso component).     

Extreme inequality aversion without separability

Hammond (J Econ Theory 11, 465–467, 1975), Meyer (J Econ Theory 11, 119–132, 1975), and Lambert (The distribution and redistribution of income Manchester University Press, Manchester, 2001) provide the formal result connecting leximin and the idea of extreme inequality aversion for social preferences of the expected utility type. Using an analogous approach, we show that for social preferences not necessarily satisfying the separability axiom that underlies expected utility theory, the case of extreme inequality aversion is covered by the class of weakly maximin social preferences—i.e., the class of social preferences that give priority to the worst off in all cases in which the worst off is not indifferent. I wish to thank Bart Capéau, Frank Cowell, Peter Lambert, Luc Lauwers, Erik Schokkaert, Frans Spinnewyn, and Bertil Tungodden for valuable comments. Remaining shortcomings are mine. Financial support from the Fund for Scientific Research - Flanders (grant G.0005.04) and the Interuniversity Attraction Poles network funded by the Federal Public Planning Service, Belgian Science Policy (grant P5/21-A) is gratefully acknowledged.     

How Politicians Make Decisions: A Political Choice Experiment

The present paper reports on a political choice experiment with elected real-world politicians. A questionnaire on political and public issues is used to examine whether prospect theory predicts the responses of experts from the field better than rational choice theory. The results indicate that framing effects do not disappear with expertise.      

Monotone risk aversion

Summary. This paper defines decreasing absolute risk aversion in purely behavioral terms without any assumption of differentiability and shows that a strictly increasing and risk averse utility function with decreasing absolute risk aversion is necessarily differentiable with an absolutely continuous derivative. A risk averse utility function has decreasing absolute risk aversion if and only if it has a decreasing absolute risk aversion density, and if and only if the cumulative absolute risk aversion function is increasing and concave. This leads to a characterization of all such utility functions. Analogues of these results also hold for increasing absolute and for increasing and decreasing relative risk aversion.Received: 31 January 2003, Revised: 15 January 2004, JEL Classification Numbers: D81.The views, thoughts and opinions expressed in this paper are those of the author in his individual capacity and should not in any way be attributed to Morgan Stanley or to Lars Tyge Nielsen as a representative, officer, or employee of Morgan Stanley.     

The role of transaction costs and risk aversion when selecting between one and two regimes for portfolio models

Estimation of the inputs is the main problem when applying portfolio analysis, and Markov regime-switching models have been shown to improve these estimates. We investigate whether the use of two-regime models remains superior across a range of values of risk aversion and transaction costs, in the presence of skewness and kurtosis and no short sales. Our results for US data suggest that, due to differences in their risk preferences and transactions costs, most retail investors may prefer to use one-regime models, while investment banks may prefer to use two-regime models.