Abstract
Kahneman and Tversky asserted a fundamental asymmetry between gains and losses, namely a “reflection effect” which occurs when an individual prefers a sure gain of $pz to an uncertain gain of $z with probability p, while preferring an uncertain loss of $z with probability p to a certain loss of $pz.
We focus on this class of choices (actuarially fair), and explore the extent to which the reflection effect, understood as occurring at a range of wealth levels, is compatible with single-self preferences.
We decompose the reflection effect into two components, a “probability switch” effect, which is compatible with single-self preferences, and a “translation effect,” which is not. To argue the first point, we analyze two classes of single-self, nonexpected utility preferences, which we label “homothetic” and “weakly homothetic.” In both cases, we characterize the switch effect as well as the dependence of risk attitudes on wealth.
We also discuss two types of utility functions of a form reminiscent of expected utility but with distorted probabilities. Type I always distorts the probability of the worst outcome downwards, yielding attraction to small risks for all probabilities. Type II distorts low probabilities upwards, and high probabilities downwards, implying risk aversion when the probability of the worst outcome is low. By combining homothetic or weak homothetic preferences with Type I or Type II distortion functions, we present four explicit examples: All four display a switch effect and, hence, a form of reflection effect consistent single self-preferences.
We thank the editors and the referees. Audiences at Keio University, at the University of Alacant, at the Universitat Pompeu Fabra, CREA, and at the University of Massachusetts, Amherst, on the occasion of the John Roemer Conference, contributed helpful comments, in particular our discussant in the latter Juan D. Moreno-Ternero. The usual caveat applies. We acknowledge the research assistance of Irina Cojuharenco. The first author gratefully acknowledges the financial support from the Spanish Ministerio de Educatioń y Ciencia, under contract no. SEC 2002-03403.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Preview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
References
Arrow, K.: Essays in the Theory of Risk Bearing. Markham, Chicago 1971
Bateman, I., Munro, A, Rhodes B., Starmer, C., Sugden, R.: A test of the theory of reference-dependent preferences. Quarterly Journal of Economics 112, 479–505 (1997)
Bernoulli, D: Specimen theoriae novae de mensura sortis. Commentarii Academiae Scientiarum Imperialis Petropolitanae, Tomus V, 175–192 (1738), translated as “Exposition of a new theory on the measurement of risk”, Econometrica 22(1), 23—26 (1954)
Bosch-Domènech, A., Silvestre J.: Does risk aversion or attraction depend on income? An experiment. Economics Letters 65, 265–273 (1999)
Bosch-Domènech, A., Silvestre J. Reflections on gains and losses: A 2×2×7 Experiment. working paper, Universitat Pompeu Fabra (2002)
Bosch-Domènech, A., Silvestre J. Do the wealthy risk more money? An experimental comparison. In: The Birgit Grodal Symposium (K. Vind, C. Schultz eds.). Springer-Verlag (in press)
Chipman, J.S.: A survey of the theory of international trade: Part 2, the neoclassical theory. Econometrica 33(4), 685–760 (1965)
Camerer, C., Issacharoff, S., Loewenstein G., O’Donoghue, T., Rabin, M.: Regulation for conservatives: Behavioral economics and the case for ‘asymmetric paternalism’. University of Pennsylvania Law Review 151(3), 1211–1254 (2003)
Friedman, M, Savage, L.J.: The utility analysis of choices involving risk. Journal of Political Economy 56(4), 279–304 (1948)
Gregory, N.: Relative wealth and risk taking: A short note on the Friedman-Savage utility function. Journal of Political Economy 88(6), 1226–1230 (1980)
Gul, F.: A theory of disappointment aversion. Econometrica 59(3), 667–686 (1991)
Hahneman, W.M.: Willingness to pay and willingness to accept: How much can they differ? American Economic Review 81, 635–647 (1991)
Horowitz, J., McConnell, K.E.: Willingness to accept, willingness to pay, and the income effect. Journal of Economic Behavior and Organization 51(4), 537–545 (2003)
Kahneman, D., Knetsch, J.L., Thaler, R.H.: The endowment effect, loss aversion and status quo bias. Journal of Economic Perspectives 5, 193–206 (1991)
Kahneman, D., Tversky, A.: Prospect theory: An analysis of decision under risk. Econometrica 47(2), 263–291 (1979)
Knetsch, J.L.: The endowment effect and evidence of nonreversible indifference curves. American Economic Review 79, 1277–1284 (1989)
Larson, D.M.: Further results on willingness to pay for nonmarket goods. Journal of Environmental Economics and Management 23(2), 101–22 (1992)
Machina, M.J.: ‘Expected utility’ analysis without the independence axiom. Econometrica 50(2), 277–324 (1982)
Markowitz, H.M.: The utility of wealth. Journal of Political Economy 60,151–158 (1952)
Munro, A., Sugden, R.: On the theory of reference-dependent preferences. Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization 50, 407–428 (2003)
Pratt, J.W: Risk aversion in the small and in the large. Econometrica 32, 122–136 (1964)
Quiggin, J.: A theory of anticipated utility. Journal of Economic Behavior and Organization 3(4), 323–343 (1982)
Quiggin, J.: Generalized Expected Utility and the Rank-Dependent Model Kluwer, Boston 1993
Rabin, M.: Risk aversion and expected-utility theory: A calibration theorem. Econometrica 68(5), 1281–1292 (2000)
Robson, A.J.: Status, the distribution of wealth, private and social attitudes to risk. Econometrica 60(4), 837–857 (1992)
Savage, L.: The Foundations of Statistics. Wiley, New York 1954
Shogren, J.F., Shin, S.Y., Hayes, D.J., Kliebenstein, J.B.: Resolving differences in willingness to pay and willingness to accept. American Economic Review 84, 255–270 (1994)
Sugden, R.: An axiomatic foundation for regret theory. Journal of Economic Theory 60, 159–180 (1993)
Sugden, R.: Reference-dependent subjective expected utility. Journal of Economic Theory 111, 172–191 (2003)
Thaler, R.H., Sunstein, C.: Libertarian paternalism. American Economic Review 93(2) (Papers and Proceedings), 175–179 (2003)
Tversky, A., Kahneman, D.: Loss-aversion in riskless choice: A reference-dependent model. Quarterly Journal of Economics 106, 1039–1061 (1991)
Tversky, A., Kahneman, D.: Advances in prospect theory: Cumulative representation of uncertainty. Journal of Risk and Uncertainty 5, 297–323 (1992)
Willig, R.D.: Incremental consumer surplus and hedonic price adjustment. Journal of Economic Theory 17(2), 227–253 (1978)
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2006 Springer-Verlag
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Bosch-Domènech, A., Silvestre, J. (2006). The gain-loss asymmetry and single-self preferences. In: Kusuoka, S., Yamazaki, A. (eds) Advances in Mathematical Economics. Advances in Mathematical Economics, vol 8. Springer, Tokyo. https://doi.org/10.1007/4-431-30899-7_4
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/4-431-30899-7_4
Received:
Revised:
Publisher Name: Springer, Tokyo
Print ISBN: 978-4-431-30898-0
Online ISBN: 978-4-431-30899-7
eBook Packages: Mathematics and StatisticsMathematics and Statistics (R0)