Skip to main content

A Large Scale Empirical Test for the Linearized Moments Model (LMM): Compatibility between Theory and Observation

  • Chapter

Part of the book series: Theory and Decision Library ((TDLB,volume 9))

Abstract

Alternatives of the form A = (x, 0; p, l−p) —where a gain (or loss) x may be obtained with probability p— are often used in non-deterministic decision making. Two potential applications are: a) testing the descriptive power of some model; b) obtaining functions and/or parameters representing a given individual in the context of a particular model.

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

Buying options

Chapter
USD   29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD   259.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD   329.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD   329.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Learn about institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Allais, M. [1952a], ‘The foundations of a positive theory of choice involving risk and a criticism of the postulates and axioms of the American school’, 27–145 in M. Allais and O. Hagen (Eds.), Expected Utility Hypotheses and the Allais Paradox, D. Reidel Publishing Co, Dordrecht, Holland (1979) 714 pp.

    Google Scholar 

  2. Allais, M. [1952b], ‘The so-called Allais paradox and rational decisions under uncertainty’, Appendix C, 437–681 in M. Allais and O. Hagen (Eds.), Expected Utility Hypotheses and the Allais Paradox, D. Reidel Publishing Co, Dordrecht, Holland (1979) 714 pp.

    Google Scholar 

  3. Cohen, M., J.F. Jaffray and T. Said [1985], ‘Individual behavior under risk and under uncertainty: an experimental study’, Theory and Decision, 18 (1985) 203–228.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Friedman, M. and L.J. Savage [1948], ‘The utility analysis of choice involving risk’, J. Pol. Econ., 56 (1948) 273–304.

    Google Scholar 

  5. Hagen, O. [1985], ‘Rules of behavior and expected utility theory. Compatibility versus dependence’, Theory and Decision, 18 (1985) 31–45.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Hardy, G.H., J.E. Littlewood and G. Polya [1934], Inequalities, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, U.K., second edition (1952) 324pp.

    Google Scholar 

  7. Kahneman, D. and A. Tversky [1979], ‘Prospect theory: an analysis of decision under risk’, Econometrica, 47, No.2 (March, 1979) 263–291.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Keeney, R.L. and H. Raiffa, Decisions with Multiple Objectives: Preferences and Value Tradeoffs, John Wiley, New York (1976) 569 pp.

    Google Scholar 

  9. Krzysztofowicz, R. ‘Strength of preference and risk attitude in utility measurement’, Organizational Behavior and Human Performance, 30 (1982).

    Google Scholar 

  10. Krzysztofowicz, R. [1983], ‘Risk attitude hypotheses of utility theory’, 201–216 in B. P. Stigum and F. Wenstop (eds.), Foundations of Utility and Risk Theory with Applications, D. Reidel Publishers, Dordrecht, Holland (1983) 491 pp.

    Google Scholar 

  11. Luce, R.D. and H. Raiffa [1957] Games and Decisions, John Wiley and Sons, Inc., 2nd. printing, New York (1958) 509 pp.

    Google Scholar 

  12. Mccord, M. and R. de Neufville [1983] ‘Fundamental deficiency of expected utility decision analysis’, 279–305, in S. French, L.C. Thomas, R. Hartley and D.J. White (Eds.), Multi-Objective Decision Making, Academic Press, London (1983) 325 pp.

    Google Scholar 

  13. Munera, H.A., Modeling of Individual Risk Attitudes in Decision Making under Uncertainty; An Application to Nuclear Power, Ph.D. dissertation, Department of Engineering, University of California, Berkeley, California, USA (September 1978) 266 pp.

    Google Scholar 

  14. Munera, H.A. [1985], ‘The generalized means model (GMM) for non-deterministic decision making: its normative and descriptive power, including sketch of the representation theorem’, Theory and Decision, 18 (1985) 173–202.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Munera, H.A. [1986a], ‘The generalized means model (GMM) for non-deterministic decision making: a unified treatment for the two contending theories’, 161–184 in L. Daboni, A. Montesano and M. Lines (eds.), Recent Developments in the Foundations of Utility and Risk Theory, D. Reidel Publishing Co., Dordrecht, Holland (1986), 404 pp.

    Google Scholar 

  16. Munera, H.A. [1986b] ‘On absolute preference and stochastic dominance’, Theory and Decision, 21 (1986) 85–88.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Munera, H.A. and R. de Neufville [1983], ‘A decision analysis model when the substitution principle is not acceptable’, 247–262 in B. P. Stigum and F. Wenstop (Eds.), Foundations of Utility and Risk Theory with Applications, D. Reidel Publishing Co., Dordrecht, Holland (1983) 491 pp.

    Google Scholar 

  18. Sarin, R.K., J.S. Dyer and K. Nair [1980] ‘A comparative evaluation of three approaches for preference function assessment’, presented at the Joint National Meeting TIMS/ORSA, Washington D.C, USA (May 4–7, 1980). Quoted by Krzysztofowicz [1982].

    Google Scholar 

  19. von Neumann, J. and O. Morgenstern [1944], Theory of Games and Economic Behavior, Princeton University Press, 3rd. edition, Science Editions, John Wiley & Sons, New York

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 1988 D. Reidel Publishing Company, Dordrecht, Holland

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Munera, H.A. (1988). A Large Scale Empirical Test for the Linearized Moments Model (LMM): Compatibility between Theory and Observation. In: Munier, B.R. (eds) Risk, Decision and Rationality. Theory and Decision Library, vol 9. Springer, Dordrecht. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-009-4019-2_17

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-009-4019-2_17

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Dordrecht

  • Print ISBN: 978-94-010-8283-9

  • Online ISBN: 978-94-009-4019-2

  • eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive

Publish with us

Policies and ethics