Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Expected Utility Hypothesis

  • Chapter
Utility and Probability

Part of the book series: The New Palgrave ((NPA))

Abstract

The expected utility hypothesis of behaviour towards risk is essentially the hypothesis that the individual decision–maker possesses (or acts as if possessing) a ‘von Neumann-Morgenstern utility function’ U(·) or ‘von Neumann-Morgenstern utility index’ {U¡} defined over some set of outcomes, and when faced with alternative risky prospects or ‘lotteries’ over these outcomes, will choose that prospect which maximizes the expected value of U(·) or {U¡}. Since the outcomes could represent alternative wealth levels, multidimensional commodity bundles, time streams of consumption, or even non–numerical consequences (e.g. a trip to Paris), this approach can be applied to a tremendous variety of situations, and most theoretical research in the economics of uncertainty, as well as virtually all applied work in the field (e.g. optimal trade, investment or search under uncertainty) is undertaken in the expected utility framework.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
eBook
USD 16.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Bibliography

  • Allais, M. 1952. Fondements d’une théorie positive des choix comportant un risque et critique des postulats et axiomes de l’école Américaine. Colloques Internationaux du Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique 40 (1953), 257–332. Trans, as: The foundations of a positive theory of choice involving risk and a criticism of the postulates and axioms of the American School, in Allais and Hagen (1979).

    Google Scholar 

  • Allais, M. and Hagen, O. (eds) 1979. Expected Utility Hypotheses and the Allais Paradox. Dordrecht: D. Reidel.

    Google Scholar 

  • Arrow, K. 1974. Essays in the Theory of Risk–Bearing. Amsterdam: North–Holland.

    Google Scholar 

  • Atkinson, A. 1970. On the measurement of inequality. Journal of Economic Theory 2(3), September, 244–63.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Batra, R. 1975. The Pure Theory of International Trade under Uncertainty. London: Macmillan; New York: Halsted Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Baumol, W. 1951. The Neumann–Morgenstern utility index: an ordinalist view. Journal of Political Economy 59(1), February, 61–6.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Baumol, W. 1958. The cardinal utility which is ordinal. Economic Journal 68, December, 665–72.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bell, D. 1982. Regret in decision making under uncertainty. Operations Research 30, September–October, 961–81.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bernoulli, D. 1738. Specimen theoriae novae de mensura sortis. Commentarii Academiae Scientiarum Imperialis Petropolitanae. Trans, as: Exposition of a new theory on the measurement of risk, Econometrica 22, January 1954, 23–36.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chew, S.H. 1983. A generalization of the quasilinear mean with applications to the measurement of income inequality and decision theory resolving the Allais paradox. Econometrica 51(4), July, 1065–92.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chew, S. and MacCrimmon, K. 1979. Alpha–Nu choice theory : a generalization of expected utility theory. University of British Columbia Faculty of Commerce and Business Administration Working Paper No. 669, July.

    Google Scholar 

  • Debreu, G. 1959. Theory of Value: An Axiomatic Analysis of Economic Equilibrium. New Haven: Yale University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Edwards, W. 1955. The prediction of decisions among bets. Journal of Experimental Psychology 50(3), September, 201–14.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ellsberg, D. 1954. Classical and current notions of’measurable utility’. Economic Journal 64, September, 528–56.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fishburn, P. 1982. The Foundations of Expected Utility. Dordrecht: D. Reidel.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Fishburn, P. 1983. Nontransitive measurable utility. Journal of Mathematical Psychology 26(1), August, 31–67.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Friedman, M. and Savage, L. 1948. The utility analysis of choices involving risk. Journal of Political Economy 56, August, 279–304.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Reprinted in Readings in Price Theory, ed. G. Stigler and K. Boulding, London: George Allen & Unwin, 1953; Chicago: R.D. Irwin, 1952.

    Google Scholar 

  • Grether, D. and Plott, C. 1979. Economic theory of choice and the preference reversal phenomenon. American Economic Review 69(4), September, 623–38.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hagen, O. 1979. Towards a positive theory of preferences under risk. In Allais and Hagen (1979).

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Herstein, I. and Milnor, J. 1953. An axiomatic approach to measurable utility. Econometrica 21, April, 291–7.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hey, J. 1979. Uncertainty in Microeconomics. Oxford: Martin Robinson; New York: New York University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hirshleifer, J. 1965. Investment decision under uncertainty: choice theoretic approaches. Quarterly Journal of Economics 79, November, 509–36.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hirshleifer, J. 1966. Investment decision under uncertainty: applications of the state-preference approach. Quarterly Journal of Economics 80, May, 252–77.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hirshleifer, J. and Riley, J. 1979. The analytics of uncertainty and information — an expository survey. Journal of Economic Literature 17(4), December, 1375–421.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kahneman, D. and Tversky, A. 1979. Prospect theory: an analysis of decision under risk. Econometrica 47(2), March, 263–91.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Karmarkar, U. 1974. The effect of probabilities on the subjective evaluation of lotteries. Massachusetts Institute of Technology Sloan School of Management Working Paper No. 698–74, February.

    Google Scholar 

  • Karni, E. 1985. Decision Making under Uncertainty: the Case of State–Dependent Preferences. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Karni, E. 1985. Increasing risk with state dependent preferences. Journal of Economic Theory 35(1), 172–7.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Karni, E. and Safra, Z. 1984. ‘Preference reversal’ and the theory of choice under risk. Johns Hopkins University Working Papers in Economics No. 141.

    Google Scholar 

  • Levhari, D. and Srinivasan, T.N. 1969. Optimal savings under uncertainty. Review of Economic Studies 36–2, April, 153–64.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lichtenstein, S. and Slovic, P. 1971. Reversals of preferences between bids and choices in gambling decisions. Journal of Experimental Psychology 89(1), July, 46–55.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lippman, S. and McCall, J. 1981. The economics of uncertainty: selected topics and probabilistic methods. In Handbook of Mathematical Economics, ed. K. Arrow and M. Intriligator, Vol. 1, Amsterdam: North–Holland.

    Google Scholar 

  • Loomes, G. and Sugden, R. 1982. Regret theory: an alternative theory of rational choice under uncertainty. Economic Journal 92 (368), December, 805–24.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McCord, M. and de Neufville, R. 1983. Empirical demonstration that expected utility analysis is not operational. In Stigum and Wenstøp (1983).

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • MacCrimmon, K. and Larsson, S. 1979. Utility theory: axioms versus ‘paradoxes’. In Allais and Hagen (1979).

    Google Scholar 

  • Machina, M. 1982. ‘Expected utility’ analysis without the independence axiom. Econometrica 50(2), March, 277–323.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Machina, M. 1983a. Generalized expected utility analysis and the nature of observed violations of the independence axiom. In Stigum and Wenstøp (1983).

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Machina, M. 1983b. The economic theory of individual behavior toward risk: theory, evidence and new directions. Institute for Mathematical Studies in the Social Sciences Technical Report No. 433, Stanford University, October.

    Google Scholar 

  • Malinvaud, E. 1952. Note on von Neumann–Morgenstern’s strong independence axiom. Econometrica 20(4), October, 679.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Markowitz, H. 1952. The utility of wealth. Journal of Political Economy 60, April, 151–8.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Marschak, J. 1950. Rational behavior, uncertain prospects and measurable utility. Econometrica 18, April, 111–41 (Errata, July 1950).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Menger, K. 1934. Das Unsicherheitsmoment in der Wertlehre. Zeitschrift für Nationalökonomie. Trans, as: The role of uncertainty in economics, in Essays in Mathematical Economics in Honor of Oskar Morgenstern, ed. M. Shubik, Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1967.

    Google Scholar 

  • Merton, R. 1969. Lifetime portfolio selection under uncertainty: the continuous time case. Review of Economics and Statistics 51(3), August, 247–57.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Morrison, D. 1967. On the consistency of preferences in Allais’ paradox. Behavioral Science 12(5), September, 373–83.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Moskowitz, H. 1974. Effects of problem representation and feedback on rational behavior in Allais and Morlat–type problems. Decision Sciences 2.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mosteller, F. and Nogee, P. 1951. An experimental measurement of utility. Journal of Political Economy 59, October, 371–404.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pratt, J. 1964. Risk aversion in the small and in the large. Econometrica 32, January–April, 122–36.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Quiggin, J. 1982. A theory of anticipated utility. Journal of Economic Behavior and Organization 3(4), December, 323–43.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Quirk, J. and Saposnick, R. 1962. Admissibility and measurable utility functions. Review of Economic Studies 29, February, 140–46.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Raiffa, H. 1968. Decision Analysis: Introductory Lectures on Choice under Uncertainty. Reading, Mass.: Addison Wesley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ramsey, F. 1926. Truth and probability. In The Foundations of Mathematics and Other Logical Essays, ed. R. Braithwaite, New York: Harcourt, Brace and Co., 1931.

    Google Scholar 

  • Reprinted in Foundations: Essays in Philosoph, Logic, Mathematics and Economics, ed. D. Mellor, New Jersey: Humanities Press, 1978.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ross, S. 1981. Some stronger measures of risk aversion in the small and in the large, with applications. Econometrica 49(3), May, 621–38.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rothschild, M. and Stiglitz, J. 1970. Increasing risk I: a definition. Journal of Economic Theory 2(3), September, 225–43.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rothschild, M. and Stiglitz, J. 1971. Increasing risk II: its economic consequences. Journal of Economic Theory 3(1), March, 66–84.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Safra, Z. 1985. Existence of equilibrium for Walrasian endowment games. Journal of Economic Theory 37(2), 366–78.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Samuelson, P. 1950. Probability and attempts to measure utility. Economic Review 1, July, 167–73. Reprinted in Stiglitz (1965).

    Google Scholar 

  • Samuelson, P. 1952. Probability, utility, and the independence axiom. Econometrica 20, October, 670–78. Reprinted in Stiglitz (1965).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Savage, L. 1954. The Foundations of Statistics. New York: John Wiley & Sons. Enlarged and revised edn, New York: Dover, 1972.

    Google Scholar 

  • Slovic, P. and Tversky, A. 1974. Who accepts Savage’s Axiom? Behavioral Science 19(6), November, 368–73.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stiglitz, J. (ed.) 1965. Collected Scientific Papers of Paul A. Samuelson, Vol. 1. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stigum, B. and Wenstøp, F. (eds) 1983. Foundations of Utility and Risk Theory with Applications. Dordrecht: D. Reidel.

    Google Scholar 

  • von Neumann, J. and Morgenstern, O. 1944. Theory of Games and Economic Behavior. Princeton: Princeton University Press. 2nd edn, 1947; 3rd edn, 1953.

    Google Scholar 

  • Whitmore, G. and Findlay, M. (eds) 1978. Stochastic Dominance: An Approach to Decision Making Under Risk. Lexington, Mass.: D.C. Heath.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Authors
  1. Mark J. Machina
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Editor information

John Eatwell Murray Milgate Peter Newman

Copyright information

© 1990 Palgrave Macmillan, a division of Macmillan Publishers Limited

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Machina, M.J. (1990). Expected Utility Hypothesis. In: Eatwell, J., Milgate, M., Newman, P. (eds) Utility and Probability. The New Palgrave. Palgrave Macmillan, London. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-349-20568-4_11

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation